Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Drowbane" data-source="post: 5980933" data-attributes="member: 23396">Now that is a loaded question. My answer: Hell no.But it depends on how much you enjoyed 3e. If you like 3e, you probably can skip out on 4e (and possibly 5e as well). If 3e leaves you wanting less, then 4e might be for you.As to getting in on the ground floor with 5e... whether it is worth the time and effort remains to be seen. The play-test material was underwhelming. Pathfinder: Check it out for yourself. In my opinion it is highly over-rated. The best part of PF is the Paizo APs, guess what! They're 3e compatible anyways. PF is just Paizo's house rules, and those are sometimes rather strange and pointless. It is not a "3e fix", despite what its fans will tell you. The second best part of Pathfinder is the setting, I really like Golarion (almost as much as I like oldskool Realms) - even if you don't buy into the PF mechanics, I recommend checking out the Fluff books (Guide to the Inner Sea, etc). 3rd best thing about PF is probably that it is supported - whatever that means. I don't need more 3e books coming out to feel like my 3e library is worth holding on to or playing.At risk of nit-picking... D&D Minis was 3e based and was only a little dumbed down - you didn't make your own guys, you got pretty much just what came on your fig's card. 4e is nothing like 3e, if anything it is a "D&D Minis Less Advanced" game. As you have far fewer options for your squads...</blockquote>

Verification