Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="deadsmurf" data-source="post: 4550312" data-attributes="member: 25341">I've only played 3/3.5 and 4th and here are my observations:3.X - generating high level characters/monsters takes a lot of time.battles more often than not are won before the battle begins, so strategy and not tactics are important. relitively small 'sweet spot' of levels of play.(for some groups) too much railroading of 'roleplaying' into skills (craft, perform, bluff etc)4 - (for some groups)Ignores simulationist's play for the benefit of gamist's and (some) narrativist's play.Unifying concepts make sweeping house rules (say like changing the way classes heal) possibly difficult to implement without breaking the game.Though I've never played really them, from what I've read:OD&D/BD&D - (for some groups) Lots of adjucation must be made by DM fiat as no rules cover them.AD&D (1&2) - too many tables to look things up.all the old editions: No definining unifiying rules system - more a series of systems and rules engines rather than a intuitive single one.(some groups) expectation of randomly choosing monsters etc rather than story based encounters.Many arbitrary restrictions based on 'game balance' or implied world.(some groups)Lack of 'roleplaying skill' rules (bluff, diplomacy etc)I'm sure there are many others but I can't think of them off hand.</blockquote>