D&D 3.x I love 3E. I love 4E. I'm mad!

[Shroomy]

I fully intend to move to 4e ASAP but I'm still buying 3.5e materials that I will probably never use....

 

[Dragonhelm]

So am I mad because I love both 3E and (what I'm hearing about) 4E. I don't understand, truly, why these two subjects have to be mutually exclusive. And if you say "They don't have to be" then I ask - "Why are they?" At least, on these boards, they seem to be.

When 3rd edition came about, there were a lot of AD&D-bashing threads. It's kind of natural when a new edition comes about to note the "mistakes" of prior editions. I had fun playing AD&D for years, so it pained me when I saw the bashing from the 3e camp. What I quickly discovered was that the AD&D diehards bashed right back. I've also seen this with the various C&C vs. D&D threads on these boards as well. It wasn't just one side, but both who spoke with spite in their voices.

I happen to be a fan of AD&D, C&C, and d20. I like other D&D variants such as True20 and Arcana Evolved. I know that I'm not alone. I used to worry about which camp I was in (old schoolers, new schoolers, etc.), but no more. I am a gamer.

The love of both 3e and 4e is not mutually exclusive. You can like more than one system. 3e is a wonderful system that works well, and I'm sure that 4e will be as well. We, as gamers, tend to get a bit...enthusiastic about our game systems. What we should remember, though, is that the game system is a tool, one designed to provide fun as well as a means of conflict resolution.

There are any number of ways to handle conflict resolution, and I believe that no single system does it right. Furthermore, we are all different people with different preferences, so what may be right for one person won't be for another.

Don't listen to the anti-3e or anti-4e crowds. Listen to your heart. Enjoy the systems that you like, and don't feel bad if you like more than one. Remember, it's all about fun, so use the tools that best lead to having fun.

 

[Ipissimus]

Yeah, I had alot of fun playing 3e. I had alot of fun playing 1e and 2e as well. And I'll upgrade to 4e because it's new and shiny and I'm a creature of curiosity and habit.

I've got alot of nostalgia for the old editions but that's not enough reason for me to dismiss a new edition out of hand as long as it seems to improve the game.

But then, who really cares? It's all DnD anyway.

 

[Agamon]

I really, really liked 3.5 before I tried playing it past L14. Now I'm really, really hoping for a quick resolution to this funky adventure path I'm running, because really, really fun, it is not.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Don't listen to the anti-3e or anti-4e crowds. Listen to your heart. Enjoy the systems that you like, and don't feel bad if you like more than one. Remember, it's all about fun, so use the tools that best lead to having fun.

QFT.

Translated for improved clarity: listen to me instead. I'm not anti-4e, I'm pro-d20. My (therefore wise and impartial) advice? Play 3e or some nifty d20 variant. . . you know you want to.

 

[Wisdom Penalty]

Good points above.

In particular, I know that I love 3.5 as a player and sometimes have issues with it as a DM. Since I DM 80% of the time I'm gaming, I tend to see more warts than I otherwise might.

Also a good point on the higher level failings of 3.5. While I grant not every group runs into these issues, I certainly see to have more problems running a 3.x game - or even playing in one - once a certain threshold in character experience is passed. For us, that's probably around level 13 or level 14.

While I'm rambling, I think the main issues - for our group - stems from the sheer versatility and power of magic at those higher levels. The skill monkey is marginalized; how can a stealthy rouge compete with arcane eye? How can good intelligence gathering in the cloak and dagger fashion compete with scry? We also as a group seem to enjoy the epic nature of overland travel, and how can that compete with teleport?

I'll grant you - those problems most likely won't go away with 4E. It's the nature of the game vs. the nature of what appeals to us about the game. We can, and have, house ruled certain spells and what-not, but that generally leaves a bad taste in my mouth because it seems the casters are getting all the restrictions.

Ah well, the points you guys raise are valid. To summarize:

1) DMing a 3.x game is more unwieldy than playing in one.
2) Higher levels in 3.x make the game more unwieldy than lower levels.
3) DMing a higher level campaign in 3.x exacerbates the issue by combining the faults.

If 4E can knock #1 or #2 to out of the picture, they'll have me at Hello. If they can knock #1 and #2 out of the picture, I'll have Mearls' children.

The Penalty

 

[The Little Raven]

I loved 3e. It restored D&D to life and brought me back to the game after a 4-year absence. It cleaned up so much, made so much other stuff clear, and provided me with tools. Then, over time, I started to realize some of it's weaknesses and soon the weight of the system was just too much for me to bear, so we parted ways for a time. Now I'm coming back to see if 4e can do the same (which I suspect it can).

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

While I'm rambling, I think the main issues - for our group - stems from the sheer versatility and power of magic at those higher levels. The skill monkey is marginalized; how can a stealthy rouge compete with arcane eye? How can good intelligence gathering in the cloak and dagger fashion compete with scry? We also as a group seem to enjoy the epic nature of overland travel, and how can that compete with teleport?

While I see this also as a problem, the worst problem for the spellcaster is that the Arcane Eye competes with Empowered Fireball or any other equal level combat spell. (But then, with an extra Fireball, who needs a scout? Just blast away whatever you stumble on!)


Playing D&D 3.5 is a lot of fun too me - at least, as long as Save or Die effects happen rarely and I am not playing a Rogue in an Undead infested adventure.
DMing is a lot more work. Preperation of monsters & NPCs can take a long time, and actually playing them during an encounter with the PCs forces me to keep a lot of things in mind. Sometimes, this really feels like work too me.

Basically everything I hear means 4E is fixing stuff that I found problematic in 3E. But compared to other games, the 3E system is still the best for me.

 

[Campbell]

I think a big part of the current hostility, as was the case with the advent of 3e, is that the a significant portion of the most vocal proponent of a new edition tend to be the sort of people that were either disenfranchised by the previous edition or are transplants from other games that are taking a fresh look at the game. Fans of the current game tend to get upset that the tastes of those who might not even like the current game are being catered to.

 

[vagabundo]

This thread reads a little like a Eulogy for 3.x...

As a pro 4e person I think very few Hate 3.5e in fact I think it is an excellent system, it is just that it's flaws have become apparent over time and nice shake-up is needed. From 4e I get a good 3e vib (skills, feats), the things I like and a good shake up of the things I dont. For me a fresh start is needed, a fresh look at the core.

So: "The king is Dead, Long live the King!"....