Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="timbannock" data-source="post: 4774837" data-attributes="member: 17913">Tough call, definitely:Social Stuff - 3e might have some more feats for social stuff, but 4e has Skill Challenges and Quests.&nbsp; Both have social skills.&nbsp; I disagree with the basis of the argument that 4e has less social stuff in it: 4e has less books out...but I feel that if we compare just the Core books, 4e actually has more system &amp; advice for social stuff than 3e.Playable Werewolf Bard - 3e's got the rules in the core books for this (PHB, DMG, MM1).&nbsp; 4e would require the PHB2 to get the Bard, or a subscription to DDI (which provides a billion other benefits, though).&nbsp; 3e's monster race rules are kinda clunky in various parts.&nbsp; 4e is much more streamlined in this regard, but that also means it's a little more open to DM calls, which could be a problem.Necromancers + Undead legions - I don't see a clear winner here.&nbsp; There is no necromancer base class in either, though a Wizard or Cleric in 3e can do the job, while in 4e you'd need to look into rituals or any of the several monsters that do necromancy.&nbsp; It's just different ways of doing the same thing.Both editions have crap tons of Undead, so no issues there.&nbsp; Both have expansion books on the undead as well (Libris Mortis for 3e, Open Grave for 4e).&nbsp; DDI for 4e can you give you ALL the undead that have been published.&nbsp; 3e would require some extra book purchases.Personally, I favor 4e.&nbsp; It's not simpler to me...but it is streamlined.&nbsp; The one is not the other, necessarily.&nbsp; 3e definitely has &quot;more to it,&quot; but I feel that largely comes from the ridiculously huge library of books.&nbsp; 4e might have less, but with DDI, you won't notice it.&nbsp; Frankly, I feel like both have too much junk out for them, but at least DDI makes it much easier to access and sort through.That help at all?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="timbannock, post: 4774837, member: 17913"] Tough call, definitely: Social Stuff - 3e might have some more feats for social stuff, but 4e has Skill Challenges and Quests. Both have social skills. I disagree with the basis of the argument that 4e has less social stuff in it: 4e has less books out...but I feel that if we compare just the Core books, 4e actually has more system & advice for social stuff than 3e. Playable Werewolf Bard - 3e's got the rules in the core books for this (PHB, DMG, MM1). 4e would require the PHB2 to get the Bard, or a subscription to DDI (which provides a billion other benefits, though). 3e's monster race rules are kinda clunky in various parts. 4e is much more streamlined in this regard, but that also means it's a little more open to DM calls, which could be a problem. Necromancers + Undead legions - I don't see a clear winner here. There is no necromancer base class in either, though a Wizard or Cleric in 3e can do the job, while in 4e you'd need to look into rituals or any of the several monsters that do necromancy. It's just different ways of doing the same thing. Both editions have crap tons of Undead, so no issues there. Both have expansion books on the undead as well (Libris Mortis for 3e, Open Grave for 4e). DDI for 4e can you give you ALL the undead that have been published. 3e would require some extra book purchases. Personally, I favor 4e. It's not simpler to me...but it is streamlined. The one is not the other, necessarily. 3e definitely has "more to it," but I feel that largely comes from the ridiculously huge library of books. 4e might have less, but with DDI, you won't notice it. Frankly, I feel like both have too much junk out for them, but at least DDI makes it much easier to access and sort through. That help at all? [/QUOTE]

Verification