3.5 or 4th edition?

[Amphimir Míriel]

If you know enough about 3.5 to have an obscure race in Races of Stone be your favorite race, you might as well play 3.5.

This comment in particular made me suspect the intentions of the original poster...

 

[Shazman]

Do you think the OP is some kind of a troll? He seemed to be too polite for that. I know quite a bit about 3.5, and even I couldn't remember what a feral gargun was until my memory was nudged a bit. I didn't own races of stone, but I looked through it a few times. If the OP is versed enough in 3.5 lore to have this sort of specific information, it stands to reason that he knows a lot about 3.5 and likes what he does know about it. Thus, it seems logical for him to try 3.5 first unless he's finding it difficult or too expensive to get the 3.5 materials he needs since they are out of print now.

 

[doctorhook]

Do you think the OP is some kind of a troll? He seemed to be too polite for that. I know quite a bit about 3.5, and even I couldn't remember what a feral gargun was until my memory was nudged a bit. I didn't own races of stone, but I looked through it a few times. If the OP is versed enough in 3.5 lore to have this sort of specific information, it stands to reason that he knows a lot about 3.5 and likes what he does know about it. Thus, it seems logical for him to try 3.5 first unless he's finding it difficult or too expensive to get the 3.5 materials he needs since they are out of print now.

OTOH, maybe the OP only likes Feral Garguns because Races of Stone is the only D&D book he's ever read. (Shudder.)

PS: Impoliteness isn't what makes someone a troll, it's a determination to stir up trouble that does.

 

[Hussar]

Do you think the OP is some kind of a troll? He seemed to be too polite for that. I know quite a bit about 3.5, and even I couldn't remember what a feral gargun was until my memory was nudged a bit. I didn't own races of stone, but I looked through it a few times. If the OP is versed enough in 3.5 lore to have this sort of specific information, it stands to reason that he knows a lot about 3.5 and likes what he does know about it. Thus, it seems logical for him to try 3.5 first unless he's finding it difficult or too expensive to get the 3.5 materials he needs since they are out of print now.

Well, combined with his claim to be 13 years old, exactly how well versed is he in the mechanics? To be able to pull a race out of a six year old book is no mean feat.

I have no idea if this is a troll or not, but, there is a definite wiffiness about this.

Or an older brother with a hefty collection.

I'd suggest if you already have access to a large number of 3e books, start with that. Why bother going out and spending money on games before you know if you'll like them or not? 3e and 4e (and earlier E's for that matter) share enough similarities that if you like one, chances are, you won't hate the others.

 

[Herschel]

3e and 4e (and earlier E's for that matter) share enough similarities that if you like one, chances are, you won't hate the others.

You must be new to these boards. Welcome.

 

[Nadaka]

skipping page 2-4...

4th edition will likely be easier on new players because there are fewer corner cases and exceptions.

I personally prefer 3.5 (more accurately I prefer a version of d20 modern) because I find that 4th edition offers so much less freedom.

Both are fine systems, but they do play differently.

 

[barbarianguy]

Thanks for the replies, everyone! Actually races of stone is one of the few 3.5 books I own, and if any of you thought I was being a troll or impolite, please forgive me. Also thanks to everyone here who have given me a welcome to ENworld and the hobby!

 

[Mistwell]

If you are looking to 'try out' 4th Edition, without a huge initial outlay, having a look at the up-comming D&D Essentials Starter set could be a good idea.

Link to Product Info

Whereas the pdf version of Pathfinder might also help you try out that without spending too much either.

Link to Product Info

I agree. The Red Box that is about to come out is intended for relatively new players to 4e, as a good introduction to the game. I would definitely check that one out. And it's fairly inexpensive.

 

[Minicol]

I prefer Pathfinder, but I'd choose 3.5 over 4e.

A large part of why is the legacy gamer inside me.

 

[Stormonu]

Just as an aside, 3.5 had a "starter" game as well... (and it's already out! )

and

(3.0 version and 3.5 version, respectively - I think the main difference is which dragon the set starts with - a black for the 3.0, a blue for the 3.5)

<Edit: It's a little hard to find on Amazon, here's the direct link> [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Dungeons-Dragons-Basic-Game/dp/0786939443/ref=pd_sim_b_1"]Amazon.com: Dungeons & Dragons Basic Game (2006) (Dungeons & Dragons Game) (9780786939442): Matthew Sernett: Books[/ame]