Search results

The reviews look good and I'm VERY interested in picking this up. Before I do I'd like to hear from those who are playing it, so that I can get a better picture of its strengths and weaknesses.

They could have built a modular version of 3.75. The core books would have represented a streamlined, cleaned-up and "fixed" version of 3.5 that addressed the big issues that people had with 3.5 (multiclassing casters being subpar, too much math slows down the game, too much DM-prep time is...

No... but a 3.5 Scarred Lands would be great (as most or all of the material for Scarred Lands was released for 3.0).

485 AD... though Pendragon is anachronistic in many regards, including its map.

I'd add my vote for Vancian magic in some form or another... though left largely intact.

Votan, Why not play a stripped down version of 3.5? We've started a 3.5 Ptolus campaign, using only the PHB, DMG and MM (plus, of course, the Ptolus books). It speeds up gameplay considerably to not have the added PrCs, spells and types of actions that came with later supplements.

With 274 votes in: 56.20% of ENWorlders play 4th Edition 42.34% of ENWorlders play 3.X Edition or Pathfinder 8.39% of ENWorlders play an OGL fantasy game like C&C or Conan 9.85% of ENWorlders play AD&D or a clone of it 9.12% of ENWorlders play BECMI D&D or a clone of it 4.74% of ENWorlders play...

...because they show a great deal of respect for their customers, for the gaming community in general and for D&D's roots.

A successful, enjoyable Old-School game is largely dependant on having a flexible and fair DM. The need to make rulings on-the-fly requires a DM who can think on his/her toes, making decisions that provide for a fast-paced game that rewards players' inventiveness and ingenuity.

Swords & Wizardry, if I'm not mistaken, is an OD&D clone (which is why I listed it beside OD&D as a poll option). I actually bought the book but, due to an upcoming move, packed it away as soon as I got it and haven't had a chance to give it a proper look-over.

I posted this poll because, with the old-school resurgence that's going on, I wanted to see if there was an up-surge in ENWorlders playing pre-3rd edition D&D. So far it looks like 3rd and 4th edition are the dominant versions. I'm pleasantly surprised to see that so many people are playing...

ooops... double post.

The poll allows multiple choices, so you can see what percentage of ENWorlders play both 3.X/Pathfinders & 4th edition. At this point it's around 50% (with 57% playing 4th edition and 47% playing 3.X). It's good to see that there's room for both.

I feel your pain. I'd love to play good ol' AD&D again but could never convince anyone I game with of its merits.

I voted for High Elves as one of my choices because they were the default elven race until 4th edition... when they became eladrin for some reason. :p

There was a poll a while ago that tried to gauge what percentage of ENWorlders were playing 3.X and/or 4th edition (or in the process of switching over). Without getting into edition bashing (please) I'd like to see the what editions of D&D are being played by the folks on these forums.

My weekend group isn't switching over from 3.5 any time soon. My weekday group just switched from 3.5 to C&C because we're looking for a less rule-intensive game. That said, if Paizo came out with a Pathfinder Basic I'd be all over it.

I'm currently playing in a 3.5 game set on Ptolus. We just started up the game, which only uses the core books + campaign setting & player's guides, and are having a blast. If it counts, I'm running a C&C game with my weekday group... having just started up a campaign with them.

I hate them because they were represent an inelegant solution to balancing classes and class combinations: e.g. Want to play an effective wizard/rogue?.?.?. You're gonna have to be an arcane trickster or daggerspell mage. Want to be a fighter that doesn't bite it at high level?.?.? Then...

The Mad Irishman is always the man to go to for such things!