D&D 3E/3.5 4E reminded me how much I like 3E

[Steely Dan]

4th Ed reminded me of how much I like Basic, 1st and 2nd Ed.

Still like 3rd Ed, too.

 

[fuindordm]

4th Ed reminded me of how much I like Basic, 1st and 2nd Ed.

Still like 3rd Ed, too.

I feel pretty much the same way.

I was already getting sick of 3E before they announced 4E, mainly because I felt like there were too many niggling details to keep track of. I pretty much agreed with most of the Design and Development articles too, which at the time were pointing out some of the areas where 3E falls flat.

I have only two 4E games under my belt so far. It's fun and there are a lot of core changes that I like (skills and skill challenges, implements, and healing surges for example). I'm not yet sure that it will end up being my edition of choice, however. The attack powers take up WAY too much design space, given how similar they all are to one another, and the way they designed magic items makes me want to cry.

Right now I'm running an AD&D game and having great fun throwing classic monsters and wacky, imbalanced magical effects at my players.

 

[SweeneyTodd]

I think it's always good when a new product can make you reconsider your preferences. I may say this over and over again, but I think that if Person A is really into 4e's philosophy, and Person B is not, then going "back to the days" when they still had different takes on how they wanted to play and putting them into the same game wasn't doing either any favors.

So yeah, anything that helps people better understand and make explicit their preferences can be a good thing.

 

[rounser]

It's like D&D has spawned two caricatures of itself. The atom is split, and it's components are spinning off independently, speeding into the vacuum.

One of the subatomic particles is 4E, an idiot savant of crunch.

The other is Hackmaster, a motley fool of flavour. (Although not an official D&D edition, it uses so much of D&D's intimate IP that it is in all but name.)

Receding rapidly away in time is 3E, only truly playable with computer generators like NPCDesigner. 2E, which was as much an exercise in campaign setting theses as a game, and did little to alter 1E. 1E and OD&D, which pioneered concepts, created some classic adventures, but without a doubt clunked loudly as game systems...but had enough charm and support for that to be overlooked.

So where is D&D now?

It's not 4E - the flavour's mostly gone or been compromised for crunch or marketing reasons. It's not Hackmaster - that borders on unplayable. 3E looks tired and needs generators - it desperately needed a new edition to bear it's load, and that never arrived. And 2E, 1E and OD&D don't cut the mustard with regard to today's game design "technology" - today people want better.

I think a lot of people are going to give up the game this time around, and maybe come back if Pathfinder or 5E does a good job. I think that D&D's owlbear has begun hibernating, and it's anyone's guess when it'll wake up.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Welcome, brother! Especially since SJG announced today that there will be dead-tree versions of the most excellent GURPS Dungeon Fantasy series at GenCon

I hope not ONLY at GEN CON? I have the pdfs already. I played 3rd Ed for over 10 years so its more like welcome back

 

[Steely Dan]

if Pathfinder does a good job.

While I have hopes, as of now it looks like a band-aid for a sucking chest wound or massive head trauma, IMO.

 

[Phlebas]

I have to disagree with Cirno.

You can't just blame the char-op but look at the adventures themselves.

Seriously, Paizo is somewhat infamous for "slapping on templates to bypass the CR of creatures" which DO require that you have a min-maxxed character.

Hell, pre-4E announcement, one of the main complaints against Paizo WAS the excessive need to min-max your character because of the lethality of the encounters.

Since i'm currently playing in shackled city, without min-maxed characters, (in fact with a couple of deliberate flavourful character concepts), and having fun (albeit sometimes being very scared) I just don't recognise this description of Paizo adventures. Of course, YMMV.

 

[Mallus]

It's not 4E - the flavour's mostly gone or been compromised for crunch or marketing reasons

I've always found that 'flavor' is what you bring to the game. My group's in the process of building a homebrew that more-or-less embraces 4e (Dragonborn, Tieflings, residuum...) and flavor's not in short supply. But it's something we're adding to the basic framework described in the rules. Isn't this how it's always been?

I mean, the only flavor that the D&D ever came in --before individual groups spiced it up-- was cheese.

 

[Tzarevitch]

Oh dear. This is so far off the mark I don't know where to begin. Wizards, Clerics, Druids are all much better than the rest. If you multi-class them you are doing your character a diservice. You can play a power house just using core as splats add little if anything to these mighty character classes.

I agree that spellcasters are easier to play in 4e; the plethora of choice once available to casters has been removed. To some this is a bug rather than a feature as system mastery is removed from the game.

Not correct. True powergamers can do scary things by picking up a level or 2 in various multiclasses for wizard and cleric. Wizard and Cleric can be multiclasses with almost no loss in capability from the original class and massive gains in power by picking and choosing your multiclasses. Only sorcerer was easier. A multiclass version is far superior to the original.

Only druid is difficult to multiclass as it tends to lose shapechanging.

Tzarevitch

 

[renau1g]

Personally I enjoy that the playing field is leveled in 4e... our 20th level fighter or 20th level wizard are roughly equal in effectiveness (albeit in different areas), whereas in 3e that wouldn't be the case... once you got past a certain point it was the spellcasters who'd rule the day, making fighters almost useless. Also, the amount of magic items required (which some people like, a character is defined by what gear they bring to the fight) and the buffing before an epic battle, which lasts only a few rounds.... (I just never liked a near-epic confrontation lasting under a minute, for cinematic purposes, but that's just me).

Also, Imaro I was expressing my group's opinion about 3e, if you don't like it/agree with it that's fine, You're right we don't have to play with every book, but it gets annoying to have to constantly have requests from players (usually guests, or at the hobby shop) to use their new shiny book.