Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 5595320" data-attributes="member: 58416">As I said in a previous post, I think the best way to compare Essentials to 3.5 would be to do the following:First, compare and contrast 3.0's core books with 3.5's core books.Second, compare and contrast the first round of 4E books (PHB1, MM1, DMG1) with Essentials -without using anything between the two to bridge the gap.I feel that is a more fair comparison because I feel the shift from 4E to 4E.E is something which has been done gradually with each new round of books.&nbsp; It was a more gradual change.&nbsp; As I also said in a previous post, I am in no way defending 3.5.&nbsp; It was a new edition; it was meant to replace 3.0.&nbsp; However; even though Essentials was not designed to serve the same purpose, I do believe that going from PHB1 to Essentials without any knowledge of anything between would be a somewhat significant shift for someone to make.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Argyle King, post: 5595320, member: 58416"] As I said in a previous post, I think the best way to compare Essentials to 3.5 would be to do the following: First, compare and contrast 3.0's core books with 3.5's core books. Second, compare and contrast the first round of 4E books (PHB1, MM1, DMG1) with Essentials -without using anything between the two to bridge the gap. I feel that is a more fair comparison because I feel the shift from 4E to 4E.E is something which has been done gradually with each new round of books. It was a more gradual change. As I also said in a previous post, I am in no way defending 3.5. It was a new edition; it was meant to replace 3.0. However; even though Essentials was not designed to serve the same purpose, I do believe that going from PHB1 to Essentials without any knowledge of anything between would be a somewhat significant shift for someone to make. [/QUOTE]

Verification