Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SlyDoubt" data-source="post: 5441218" data-attributes="member: 6667337">You're absolutely right on all accounts. It's just a different perspective ultimately and if you come from 3.x PF takes that perspective and adds qualities a lot of us wanted to see. Qualities many later books in the 3.5 cycle touched on like issues with classes being interesting outside of feat/spell selection.I'm not sure if I'm the oddball out as I don't exactly play with other 3.x DMs/players. I've mostly had the same group give or take a few people since the 3E adventure box set came out. I've played 3.x, PF, SW Revised, SW Saga, d20 Modern, WHFRP and 4E. In general firmly in the D20/3.x mold started by 3E. I've grown into the system and so it's rather comfy for me. I've made it my own over the past 10 years. Some things will always be cumbersome just by existing. They require a degree of complication to make any sense at all. I can definitely see how 4E is toolbox to some. To me it isn't though because I find things less 'believable' or relatable to real world scenarios. The scaling nature of everything in the game throws me off personally. Not that 3.x/PF doesn't scale but it scales less related simply to abstract 'level' and more to power. That's how it feels for me at least. My players know some things are more dangerous than others because of what they are inherently, not because the specific version is more dangerous than the average example. I find 4E more linear and less sandbox friendly just due to it's design. That doesn't mean it can't be done I just don't feel it fits as well.Certainly agree about the players part. My players aren't into rules. They don't min-max and really are more interested in making characters they enjoy using and playing in scenarios that are exciting. I find having a bunch of bonuses that can be thrown around easier to manage rules wise than powers. I absolutely love the power structure. I think it's wonderful and it reminds me of when Magic changed from 'summon creature' to 'creature - x'. It was huge and so simple and opened up a tremendous amount of space to explore when it comes to design/mechanics. But it also makes things less immediately malleable to me. It's slightly more opaque in the moment, during the encounter, than the raw mechanics of 3.x/PF. Outside of that though I do think it's wonderful and was really excited by Essentials. Classes with non-power abilities other than feats/skills really got me re-interested in what felt like the blandness of 4E. I'm very disappointed to see the class compendium cancelled. That was something I was really excited for, more essentialsish style takes on PHB classes, clarifications on some things never fully explained between essentials/core. I realize I'm apparently weird for liking books but gosh darnit I want it in printed and bound!I'm supposed to start a new campaign soon. For the first time doing it online. We'll likely use maptools as it seems to cover everything but system and setting are still up in the air. Based on the people involved it'll likely be PF and I'm cool with that. It's just ironic that now that I'm playing in a digital game the thing I've shunned (DDI) would be most useful. Oh well. I'll continue waiting to see how 4E develops. I've been waiting since not long after it came out for books I felt were worth buying. Essentials was what I wanted 4E to be so it's difficult seeing it flounder around. Hopefully they turn things around, for us and for them as employees.</blockquote>

Verification