Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AllisterH" data-source="post: 4332615" data-attributes="member: 51325">The thing is, I'm not sure I agree with those that want "everything" from 3e especially given that everything was really, well NOT everything.I mean, take the monk, bard and the fighter. All 3 classes that frankly, didn't work out of the gate and you had to wait until the splatbooks.Would it have better to hold off on those classes and actually insure that they, I don't know, actually work?A lot of 3E options were just plain bad (I really, REALLY hope System mastery wasn't intentional) or at the least, seriously sub-optimal.Take the very first chapter, races. 4E's races actually are all interesting and have strengths but the difference IMO is that you can pretty much use ANY race with ANY class and be happy with your choice.Compare this with the races in 3E. If you had a penalty in a stat, chances were, you're not going to be playing that race-class combination.There was much wider variances in the 3.5 options which in my experience actally meant most of the lesser options just didn't get taken (did anyone take Toughness for any reason other than PrC)I mean, a feat like Skill Focus/Skill Training in 4E is actually useful for EVERYBODY when the equivalent feat in 3E was a noob option.So, here's my question.Is it better to have 5 options where the difference between the worst and the best is much smaller than with 10 options where the difference between the worst and best is MUCH, MUCH wider.</blockquote>

Verification