Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Starfox" data-source="post: 5045657" data-attributes="member: 2303">4E is a breeze to DM for. if you can get your players to embrace it, I'd say go for it. The cons are that the game is not nearly as balanced as it claims, much of the base rules (like Non-Armor-Defenses) don't work well, and it is safe, predictable, and slow in play which can make it a bit boring. 4E characters can also feel frat, and character development is restricted to the existing class options - if you like them you are good, but if you want to play something not statted up as a class, you are stonewalled.3E is faster, more lethal, and swingier. This makes it more dangerous and less boring. There is a lot more freedom in designing player characters and in general, the player side of the game works better than 4E. PCs end up being more interesting and less one-dimensional. Nor is 3E really as unbalanced as is often claimed, and the lack of siloing means PCs can actually make up a lack in one area with a strength in another.&nbsp; The cons is the DM workload; the huge amount of work needed if you stat something up by the rules. And playing a non-spelluser in 3E can get pretty disappointing - not so much because of lack of power as lack of utility. Spells &gt;&gt; Skills in 3E.In conclusion: 4E is a good game if you can stand its lack of feeling. 3E is a pretty bad GAME, but with a better feel.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Starfox, post: 5045657, member: 2303"] 4E is a breeze to DM for. if you can get your players to embrace it, I'd say go for it. The cons are that the game is not nearly as balanced as it claims, much of the base rules (like Non-Armor-Defenses) don't work well, and it is safe, predictable, and slow in play which can make it a bit boring. 4E characters can also feel frat, and character development is restricted to the existing class options - if you like them you are good, but if you want to play something not statted up as a class, you are stonewalled. 3E is faster, more lethal, and swingier. This makes it more dangerous and less boring. There is a lot more freedom in designing player characters and in general, the player side of the game works better than 4E. PCs end up being more interesting and less one-dimensional. Nor is 3E really as unbalanced as is often claimed, and the lack of siloing means PCs can actually make up a lack in one area with a strength in another. The cons is the DM workload; the huge amount of work needed if you stat something up by the rules. And playing a non-spelluser in 3E can get pretty disappointing - not so much because of lack of power as lack of utility. Spells >> Skills in 3E. In conclusion: 4E is a good game if you can stand its lack of feeling. 3E is a pretty bad GAME, but with a better feel. [/QUOTE]

Verification