Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="haakon1" data-source="post: 3722269" data-attributes="member: 25619">Only the odd-numbered movies/editions are good . . .I feel the same way about the transition from AD&amp;D (1st Edition) to 3.0.I was no fanboy of 1.5 Edition (that would be the original Unearthed Arcana).&nbsp; Cavaliers and barbarians were cool in concept, but poor executed.&nbsp; Most of the new spells added nothing to the game.&nbsp; The new magic items, pole arm article, and non-human gods I yoinked into my AD&amp;D game.I never played much 2nd Edition.&nbsp; My first impressions of it were poor (no more demons, no more orc PC's, no more assassin PC's), especially since my PC at the time of the cross-over was a half-orc assassin.&nbsp; So I went back to AD&amp;D, playing it until 2001 or so.After those mixed to bad experiences, I was willing to try 3e, but only as a player at first.&nbsp; I realized it was complicated and slower, but fun.&nbsp; So, given player pressure, I conformed to the new norm.When I saw 3.5, I bought it right away and liked it.&nbsp; It was like what 1.5 or 2 should have been -- a very minor change that cleaned up some of the original design problems of 3.0, but had zero compatibility issues.&nbsp; Sure, you pay twice to a similar &quot;hat&quot;, but it was NEW hat, and a good one at that.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />But 4.0 sounds doofy.So, my theory is: D&amp;D is like Star Trek movies.&nbsp; Only the odd-numbered ones are good.So go go 5th Edition!&nbsp; Maybe that can be D&amp;D: Generations, where Gary Gygax comes badk to the fold?&nbsp;&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="haakon1, post: 3722269, member: 25619"] [b]Only the odd-numbered movies/editions are good . . .[/b] I feel the same way about the transition from AD&D (1st Edition) to 3.0. I was no fanboy of 1.5 Edition (that would be the original Unearthed Arcana). Cavaliers and barbarians were cool in concept, but poor executed. Most of the new spells added nothing to the game. The new magic items, pole arm article, and non-human gods I yoinked into my AD&D game. I never played much 2nd Edition. My first impressions of it were poor (no more demons, no more orc PC's, no more assassin PC's), especially since my PC at the time of the cross-over was a half-orc assassin. So I went back to AD&D, playing it until 2001 or so. After those mixed to bad experiences, I was willing to try 3e, but only as a player at first. I realized it was complicated and slower, but fun. So, given player pressure, I conformed to the new norm. When I saw 3.5, I bought it right away and liked it. It was like what 1.5 or 2 should have been -- a very minor change that cleaned up some of the original design problems of 3.0, but had zero compatibility issues. Sure, you pay twice to a similar "hat", but it was NEW hat, and a good one at that. :) But 4.0 sounds doofy. So, my theory is: D&D is like Star Trek movies. Only the odd-numbered ones are good. So go go 5th Edition! Maybe that can be D&D: Generations, where Gary Gygax comes badk to the fold? :p [/QUOTE]

Verification