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

[BryonD]

Simply translating them into 3E as they did truly unbalanced.

That does not reflect my experience.

 

[Keith Robinson]

Simply translating them into 3E as they did truly unbalanced.

In your opinion. I'm happy with the changes that were made. It made my gaming experience a better one.

 

[Ampolitor]

Not liking 4E

Well I bought all three books, read them and Me no like. It feels way too much like a video game manual to me. Just my opinion but thats not the D&D that I love. SOOO I just picked up Hackmaster on a friends recommendation. The GAME rocks! I wish I had played this earlier!

 

[Jack Colby]

Actually, 4E reminded me how, even as different as 4E is, 3E/3.5E is the only version of the game that is not D&D-like and that I never want to play or be involved with again. It was missing a certain feel that is central to the D&D experience. Every edition but 3rd has it. 3rd is like an exercise in tediousness and pointlessness to me.

 

[AllisterH]

In your opinion. I'm happy with the changes that were made. It made my gaming experience a better one.

*Shrug*

If you were a spellcaster, I could see why....

But if you're a rogue? or any other non-spellcaster?

Knock, invisibility et al are all balanced in a system where for one example, wizards cant bypass the slot limit.

That goes flying out the door when scrolls and wands are relatively cheap when shared among the party.

 

[billd91]

"The game everyone wants to play and no one wants to DM" - sound familiar?

Sounds like just about every rule system I've ever played. There have always been more players than willing referees.

 

[Greg K]

Actually, 4E reminded me how, even as different as 4E is, 3E/3.5E is the only version of the game that is not D&D-like and that I never want to play or be involved with again. It was missing a certain feel that is central to the D&D experience. Every edition but 3rd has it. 3rd is like an exercise in tediousness and pointlessness to me.

To each their own. 3e is the only edition of DND that I'll play. Then again, I stopped playing DND prior to 3e, because of the mechanics and 4e, while introducing a few changes I like, has a lot of mechanial and design philosophy that I dislike.

Of course to enjoy 3e, my friends and I have to ignore the majority of WOTC's supplements including their late 3.5 books while using UA and some 3pp material.

 

[Wormwood]

There have always been more players than willing referees.

My experience as well, but 4e has really opened up interest in DMing in my two groups.

I've *never* had so many players who want to take a turn running a game of D&D (6 out of 8!).

 

[Ahglock]

I'm with Hussar.

I've stated before but the 1e/2e spells work under an entirely different paradigm.

Simply translating them into 3E as they did truly unbalanced.

You were NOT supposed to have flying, invisible buffed wizard in combat. It simply was not an option in 1e/2e without the DM's explicit approval.

Knock wasn't supposed to be something you could put in a wand and walk around with and have just as effective.

Well I'll say I think they lamified a lot of the spells for the same reason 4 e made changes...simplification. Spells like fireball were much cooler when they filled a volume none of this concrete area of effect crap. They unmagiked my magic.

As for me balance wise the problem really wasn't the spells but charged items. A wand of knock was lame. Now in my games it was not an issue since no one played item creators, and the only time I saw a wand of knock was when i was playing and I made a rogue/wizard character with the rogue/wizard prestige class that came out early on in 3e.

A wizard casting knock once a day is not a big deal, a wizard popping every door is.

 

[Keith Robinson]

*Shrug*

Hmm, I'm sure you were trying to say something, but I just stopped listening. It wasn't worth the effort. Neither are you.

What a wonderful thing the ignore list is