Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4284824" data-attributes="member: 2067">What does 3e do better?#1: Nautical or Aquatic campaigns, where there are sailing ships and sharks and lots of swimming. 3e had some pretty extensive aquatic rules.#2: As you mentioned above: &quot;Mundanes&quot; campaigns, where you play normal folks caught up in things. 3e's NPC classes were excellent, but even just playing from levels 1-5ish could have given you that feel.#3: Monsters as PC's. The system was horribly flawed, but it works a lot better than 4e's &quot;You can't&quot; rule. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />#4: Wilderness exploration. Rules for weather, climate, terrain, random encounters, and monster habitat lead a very &quot;living world&quot; feel to the game, while 4e focuses more on &quot;Have an encounter if your bored!&quot;#5: Evil Parties; Good vs. Good campaigns. 3e had a quantity of Good adversaries, and could make the distinction between types of evil so that evil fighting evil seemed to make a sort of thematic sense. 4e runs the route of &quot;everything is morally ambiguous!&quot; which doesn't help foster that style as much.#6: Different eras and parts of the world. 3e had support for this (though a small amount) built right into the DMG. 4e lacks it entirely.....that's the short list.Note that 4e probably could do a lot of these, they'd just require some supplements, while 3e could handle these right out of the gate.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 4284824, member: 2067"] What does 3e do better? #1: Nautical or Aquatic campaigns, where there are sailing ships and sharks and lots of swimming. 3e had some pretty extensive aquatic rules. #2: As you mentioned above: "Mundanes" campaigns, where you play normal folks caught up in things. 3e's NPC classes were excellent, but even just playing from levels 1-5ish could have given you that feel. #3: Monsters as PC's. The system was horribly flawed, but it works a lot better than 4e's "You can't" rule. ;) #4: Wilderness exploration. Rules for weather, climate, terrain, random encounters, and monster habitat lead a very "living world" feel to the game, while 4e focuses more on "Have an encounter if your bored!" #5: Evil Parties; Good vs. Good campaigns. 3e had a quantity of Good adversaries, and could make the distinction between types of evil so that evil fighting evil seemed to make a sort of thematic sense. 4e runs the route of "everything is morally ambiguous!" which doesn't help foster that style as much. #6: Different eras and parts of the world. 3e had support for this (though a small amount) built right into the DMG. 4e lacks it entirely. ....that's the short list. Note that 4e probably could do a lot of these, they'd just require some supplements, while 3e could handle these right out of the gate. [/QUOTE]

Verification