D&D 3E/3.5 4E Ruined My Love For 3.5

[Jack99]

I was starting to get annoyed about 3.5, just around the time that 4e was announced. I loved what I heard right from the get go, so I soon turned into a raging 4e fanboy. However, I was determined to end my 3.5 campaign before starting 4e.

As time passed, 3.5 just became more and more annoying, to the point where I barely could look forward to playing.

Now we are on a break in the campaign, due to a bad case of force majeure. So since all can't show up, we are running 4e test-drives instead, while waiting for the opportunity to once again have all players together, so that we can finish the campaign. I have shortened it considerably, so that we only need to play once or twice more, to be done.

But ATM, the thought of playing 3.5, even only once or twice, is enough to send shivers down my spine. Which is also why I sold almost all of my books. Never again, even if 4e turns out to be really bad, I will not play 3.5. I rather go back playing WoW or Everquest!

Cheers

Edit: found a word I wasn't allowed to use..

 

[Jack99]

I don't see how 4E's going to change this. From my read on the unofficial rules collection (thanks, Morrus!) here on Enworld and, more importantly, from some powergamers who tested the rules, folks will find ways to work the 4E rules to their advantage as they did in 3.x.

Could you most kindly provide a link, I would be very interested in reading what these masters of the rules have come up with.

 

[joela]

in due time

I am quite sure that the new system will have just as many quirks as the old, once it has been driven around the block a few times.

OFT. I wasn't around at the time, but some of my fellow DMs and players rejoined as hard, if not harder, as 4E supporters when 3.0 first came onto the scene. For me, coming in at 3.5 from an AD&D 1st background, I was both amazed and appalled: low level wizards didn't nearly have to rely on a crossbow as much but shopping for frickin' magic items? And what is this "balanced" cr$#? Playing superhero games concurrently and after AD&D 1st, I learned that players, if determined, will find the loopholes in the system and break any so-called "balanced" encounter set by the DM. Some of my fellow DMs who have already tested the unofficial rules compendium released here on ENworld and follow the forums have already see some flaws and are speculating how to take advantage of it. The recent report that PCs can "multiclass" by taking feats to acquire other classes' abilities already has my DM stick twitching to smack any powergamer in my 4E game(s).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I will wait until I get the books before I make an assessment about 4E. But from my point of view, they feel like two very different games...the claim that 4E is killing one's love for 3.5 is like saying Clue killed one's love for Monopoly. (shrug) Which happens, I suppose.

Me too. Personally, I want to see the complete Core 3, warts and all, before I make my call on 4Ed's quality.

However, some of the posters' comments in this thread makes me wonder about whether some of them would play complex minis wargames like DDM or Confrontation when they can play this sleek, simple, abstracted wargame called chess.

Personally, while 4Ed may be a good or even great game, its not going to diminish my respect for other games. If someone came up to me tomorrow and asked if I wanted to join an AD&D or Classic Traveller game, I'd seriously consider it.

 

[Jack99]

Personally, while 4Ed may be a good or even great game, its not going to diminish my respect for other games. If someone came up to me tomorrow and asked if I wanted to join an AD&D or Classic Traveller game, I'd seriously consider it.

I think a lot of people forget that for some, playing = DM'ing, and there is a world of difference between having to play a game and DM a game. I can only speak for myself of course, but I wouldn't mind being a player in a 3.5 game. My previous post was from the DM's perspective, since that is what I am most of the time (I have only played in 2 campaigns as a player since 94', neither lasting more than 8 months or so).

Cheers

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

It upsets me a little when I read through Pathfinder or read about the Book of Experimental Might because six months ago I would have loved those books. I would have pre-ordered Pathfinder, I would have duked it out on the Paizo forums with other fans, read every thread on montecook.com about the BOXM.

And now all I can think about when I read Pathfinder is how it doesn't compare (for me) to Fourth Edition. My ambition to tinker 3.5 into perfection (and unrecognisability) has gone.

Oh yeah. I think I would have welcomed Pathfinder and possibly the BOXM before 4E came. They are something new and fresh. But now, I only worry that I don't get my High Quality Adventure Fix from Paizo.

That said, we will still try out Pathfinder (as long as we don't switch 4E). Our Savage Tides master decided that we would try Pathfinder Alpha in the next session - a little unfortunate for those of us who enjoyed playing non-Pathfinder classes like Warlock and Dragon Shaman, but on the other hand, we get new toys to play with.

But I actually didn't run D&D myself - a few months before 4E was announced, I started an Iron Heroes campaign, and using stuff like the VIllain Classes made things a lot easier.

But after having run an 4E playtest, I am not sure I am even interested in that any more.

 

[joela]

Mmo

Never again, even if 4e turns out to be really bad, I will not play 3.5. I rather go back playing WoW or Everquest!

I don't get it. If you're comparing a tabletop rpg to an MMO, and the latter is the cat's meow, why even bother buying the PH? Even DnD 4E is going to require a DM, players, at least one rulebook (the PH), dice, pencils, and paper. WoW and EQ on the other hand, require a PC, software, and an Internet connection.

 

[Gotham Gamemaster]

4e is fun in the way Gauntlet is fun. But aside from the names, it doesn't feel like D&D to me. Each new tidbit about 4e makes me value my 3.5 collection more than ever. I'll be running Pathfinder.

 

[joela]

chess

However, some of the posters' comments in this thread makes me wonder about whether some of them would play complex minis wargames like DDM or Confrontation when they can play this sleek, simple, abstracted wargame called chess.

BWAHAHAHAHA! Touche! Probably still too many rules. Oh, and lack of realism. Or not enough like their favorite MMO

 

[hong]

I don't get it. If you're comparing a tabletop rpg to an MMO, and the latter is the cat's meow, why even bother buying the PH?

You got it exactly back to front. Jack is saying WoW is bad, but 3.5 is worse.