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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 3705690" data-attributes="member: 1465">At the moment I am not upset. I will be upset only if I don't like it and everybody else does, which means I'd still want to play 3.0 and not find anyone willing to...I liked 3rd edition more than the older editions because I thought the mechanics were a very good balance between realism, playability and flexibility. I disliked the 3.5 revision after trying it for at least 6 month, because for my taste there were only very small improvements, and for each of them there was one small thing that got worse. I also think that 99% of the "problems with 3.x" come from supplementary material, particularly because it's written by different people; the more you stick to the core, the less problems... This is unavoidable in any edition, and however good 4e will be, there will certainly be problems with supplements.I think the greatest strength of 3.0 was that is was designed by a great but limited team of talented designers. The game was designed as a whole, and different aspects of the game were fit together. 3.5 instead was more designed as a collection of "fixes", many of which came from players feedback and others from designers: in principle a good thing, but when WotC made the decision of which fixes were "in" and which were "out", it didn't seem like they truly though-out all the implications and how the fixes would work together (a pet peeve of mine: no one in WotC noticed that while all classes were being buffed, the Sorcerer was being significantly turned down).The team who created 3.0 worked together for how long? At least 1.5 years, IIRC. And at that time most of the focus of WotC was probably put into designing the new edition. I do not know if 4e has been designed with such a focus, and not instead more like 3.5, which seemed to be designed as a "delta" version of the game and not from the ground up.Also, 3.0 was heavily playtested in quite an organized way... I have no idea yet how much 4e is being playtested, but 3.5 didn't display much playtesting credits at least.The online trend I certainly don't like, but I'm free to ignore it. I certainly do not like the idea of playing online mostly. Can be fun sometimes, but I like RPGs because they are a game I can play with friends, and as an excuse to spend my time with them... I'm sure gamers will still do that, and anyone can play both tabletop and online. Still, doesn't feel that nice to me to know that most young people will start playing RPGs online, enclosed in their little rooms in front of the screen, alone. One more opportunity to seclude themselves instead of socializing :\ But thank god we can anyway just look at 4e for what it still is after all: just another ruleset  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> The more ruleset, the more options to choose from so that we like our games better. In 3rd edition years, there has been already lots of ruleset by the way: C&C, Iron Heroes, Arcana Unearthed/Evolved, d20 Modern...</blockquote>

Verification