kitsune9
Adventurer
I would say that I had a blast running a lot of stuff for 3E with the haste, harm, and heal, and monster advancement.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
What is your favorite edition of D&D and why?
- Thread starter Mercurius
- Start date
I would say that I had a blast running a lot of stuff for 3E with the haste, harm, and heal, and monster advancement.
I am the sort that is more about the story. So, as a player, any edition is good for me. They all have both good points and points that don't work well for me.
As a DM, I'm finding 4e the easiest to DM. Perhaps it is just that I am more experienced, or it is the rule set itself, or some combination of the two... but whatever the reason, I am having an easy time DMing 4e. And I couldn't see myself DMing an older edition (for something long term) after having done this edition.
As a DM, I'm finding 4e the easiest to DM. Perhaps it is just that I am more experienced, or it is the rule set itself, or some combination of the two... but whatever the reason, I am having an easy time DMing 4e. And I couldn't see myself DMing an older edition (for something long term) after having done this edition.
gribble
Explorer
You know, in the last week or two I think I've changed my mind a fair bit on this!
As a DM I really like the ease of prep for 4e, although tracking conditions/marks/etc actually seems to make running 4e a lot more fiddly for me. Unfortunately, I really don't like a lot of the 4e fluff and I've found the 4e adventures thus far to be really terrible. As I don't have the time to create or convert my own stuff that means running 3.5 adventures from Paizo.
Having said that, 4e Eberron has almost changed my mind in the last couple of weeks. My right brain loves the Eberron world, and I think 4e is really the perfect system for running it. That and the fact that the 4e Eberron adventures actually don't seem to be so terrible has me changing my mind to considering running a 4e Eberron game as a DM.
As a player, I've been playing 4e lately, and other than high paragon and epic play I've really enjoyed it. Making up characters using the character builder is a blast, and the mechanics run really fast and smooth as a player (because you only need to keep track of your own conditions/marks/etc).
Having said that, my 3.5 campaign ended in a TPK on Sunday, and someone else is going to run a Pathfinder Legacy of Fire campaign. I've been making up my character and it really reminded me how much more fun and customisation there is when making up a 3.x character.
Maybe it's because of the character builder or 4e having more limited options, but when I make up a 4e character the process seems to be to choose a race/class and then come up with fluff and/or a schtick that matches. When I make up a 3.x character I choose the fluff/schtick first, and then there are so many crunchy options I can choose the right combination of race/class/feat to match pretty much any concept.
So as a DM (right brain?) - 4e for prep and Eberron fluff/adventures, 3e for running and other fluff/adventures.
And as a player (left brain?) - 3e for character creation/advancement, 4e for playing.
As a DM I really like the ease of prep for 4e, although tracking conditions/marks/etc actually seems to make running 4e a lot more fiddly for me. Unfortunately, I really don't like a lot of the 4e fluff and I've found the 4e adventures thus far to be really terrible. As I don't have the time to create or convert my own stuff that means running 3.5 adventures from Paizo.
Having said that, 4e Eberron has almost changed my mind in the last couple of weeks. My right brain loves the Eberron world, and I think 4e is really the perfect system for running it. That and the fact that the 4e Eberron adventures actually don't seem to be so terrible has me changing my mind to considering running a 4e Eberron game as a DM.
As a player, I've been playing 4e lately, and other than high paragon and epic play I've really enjoyed it. Making up characters using the character builder is a blast, and the mechanics run really fast and smooth as a player (because you only need to keep track of your own conditions/marks/etc).
Having said that, my 3.5 campaign ended in a TPK on Sunday, and someone else is going to run a Pathfinder Legacy of Fire campaign. I've been making up my character and it really reminded me how much more fun and customisation there is when making up a 3.x character.
Maybe it's because of the character builder or 4e having more limited options, but when I make up a 4e character the process seems to be to choose a race/class and then come up with fluff and/or a schtick that matches. When I make up a 3.x character I choose the fluff/schtick first, and then there are so many crunchy options I can choose the right combination of race/class/feat to match pretty much any concept.
So as a DM (right brain?) - 4e for prep and Eberron fluff/adventures, 3e for running and other fluff/adventures.
And as a player (left brain?) - 3e for character creation/advancement, 4e for playing.
I was never really concerned with "playing an edition" from TSR -- it was all just "D&D" to me -- so I'll go with what is literally my favorite book:
1977 "blue cover" Dungeons & Dragons, a.k.a. "Holmes Basic"
The 1st ed. Dungeon Masters Guide gets a lot more reference from me these days, containing as it does such a mind-boggling wealth of useful material.
Still, the Holmes book never fails to refresh and inspire me when I turn its pages. Nostalgia is a significant part of that pleasure, although not when I pick up the little brown books (my introduction, and what I have used most as DM) or the hard-bounds (representative of most of my experience as player).
There's something neat about a book that's just 48 pages, yet opens up whole worlds of adventure. From this latter-day perspective, it's cool to notice distinctive little rules and hints of "paths not taken" in later developments. The encouragement to "do your own thing", and the informality in addressing the reader are a nice change of pace (also notable in Tunnels & Trolls).
It takes me back, not so much to a point in time as to a place of understanding. When I have wandered too far into complications, Holmes brings me back to the real basics. Oh, yeah! This is what the game is all about! Lightning strikes again, and I am re-energized.
1977 "blue cover" Dungeons & Dragons, a.k.a. "Holmes Basic"
The 1st ed. Dungeon Masters Guide gets a lot more reference from me these days, containing as it does such a mind-boggling wealth of useful material.
Still, the Holmes book never fails to refresh and inspire me when I turn its pages. Nostalgia is a significant part of that pleasure, although not when I pick up the little brown books (my introduction, and what I have used most as DM) or the hard-bounds (representative of most of my experience as player).
There's something neat about a book that's just 48 pages, yet opens up whole worlds of adventure. From this latter-day perspective, it's cool to notice distinctive little rules and hints of "paths not taken" in later developments. The encouragement to "do your own thing", and the informality in addressing the reader are a nice change of pace (also notable in Tunnels & Trolls).
It takes me back, not so much to a point in time as to a place of understanding. When I have wandered too far into complications, Holmes brings me back to the real basics. Oh, yeah! This is what the game is all about! Lightning strikes again, and I am re-energized.
Stuntman
First Post
My favourite edition is 4E.
Many of the other members have talked about many of the reasons I like 4E the most. What I like to add is that I naturally like to optimise my character and generally will be attracted to the most optimal character choices when creating my character. I find that with 4E, there wasn't just one optimal character choice for me to take. There are many that are good to take. I find this aspect of 4E to be the best.
No longer do I automatically pick the very best choices which are clearly better than others. I had many meaningful choices because many were quite viable. It allows me to focus more on what I want my character to be rather than worry about ensuring my character was effective. The character I am playing right now is by no means the most effective, but it makes as meaninful a contribution in combat as any of the more refined characters in the group.
The other reason I like 4E the most is I feel that the multiclassing system in 4E is the better than any other edition. Multiclassing was too overpowered in 2E and before. It was too weak in 3E and had to be saved in 3.5 with prestige classes for every single multiclass combination you want to play. Multiclassing in 4E allows you to add abilities from a second class without severly hindering your effectiveness or making you overpowered. Also, 4E multiclassing does not make single classed characters obsolete. The fact that single classed characters are a good option and multiclassing is not a trap option (for the most part) shows how well balanced 4E multiclassing is.
Many of the other members have talked about many of the reasons I like 4E the most. What I like to add is that I naturally like to optimise my character and generally will be attracted to the most optimal character choices when creating my character. I find that with 4E, there wasn't just one optimal character choice for me to take. There are many that are good to take. I find this aspect of 4E to be the best.
No longer do I automatically pick the very best choices which are clearly better than others. I had many meaningful choices because many were quite viable. It allows me to focus more on what I want my character to be rather than worry about ensuring my character was effective. The character I am playing right now is by no means the most effective, but it makes as meaninful a contribution in combat as any of the more refined characters in the group.
The other reason I like 4E the most is I feel that the multiclassing system in 4E is the better than any other edition. Multiclassing was too overpowered in 2E and before. It was too weak in 3E and had to be saved in 3.5 with prestige classes for every single multiclass combination you want to play. Multiclassing in 4E allows you to add abilities from a second class without severly hindering your effectiveness or making you overpowered. Also, 4E multiclassing does not make single classed characters obsolete. The fact that single classed characters are a good option and multiclassing is not a trap option (for the most part) shows how well balanced 4E multiclassing is.
Maldin
First Post
Don't forget... crush you!!!
... under the shear weight of their accumulated feats and skills.
When monster stat blocks start reaching 2, 3, even 4 pages in length (and I've seen'em!), and take orders of magnitude more time to write up then to defeat in combat, something is wonky.
Denis, aka "Maldin"
Maldin's Greyhawk http://melkot.com
Last edited:
Irda Ranger
First Post
Hard to say precisely, because I borrow rules from most of the Editions from OD&D to 4E. House rules too where nothing quite fits. I guess AD&D 1E is the heart of my game because that's where most of the rules come from and all of the spirit. But many of AD&D's rules are jettisoned for Classic's simplicity.
I far prefer fixed classes to any sort of "build." I like abstract combat over the more detailed combat engines of 3E and 4E. I'm not a fan of universal mechanics, because bespoke mechanics are always a better fit for a given situation. I like short, simple stat blocks.
My favorite thing from 4E is Rituals.
I far prefer fixed classes to any sort of "build." I like abstract combat over the more detailed combat engines of 3E and 4E. I'm not a fan of universal mechanics, because bespoke mechanics are always a better fit for a given situation. I like short, simple stat blocks.
My favorite thing from 4E is Rituals.
ExploderWizard
Hero
B/X The Moldvay/Cook/Marsh edition.
As both a player and a DM one word sums it all up: Simplicity.
The art. So raw, unpolished, and evocative of swords & sorcery.
Prep is all about the fluff, the stats completely get the heck out of your way:
Goblin (AC 6, HD 1-1, hp 5, Att: 1 wpn, Dmg 1-6, MV 60'(20'), AL;C, ML:7
Save As:NM)
House rules and additions are easy to plug in and use without disrupting overall balance.
I suspect OD&D would be in the top spot if I had ever gotten the chance to actually play.
As both a player and a DM one word sums it all up: Simplicity.
The art. So raw, unpolished, and evocative of swords & sorcery.
Prep is all about the fluff, the stats completely get the heck out of your way:
Goblin (AC 6, HD 1-1, hp 5, Att: 1 wpn, Dmg 1-6, MV 60'(20'), AL;C, ML:7
Save As:NM)
House rules and additions are easy to plug in and use without disrupting overall balance.
I suspect OD&D would be in the top spot if I had ever gotten the chance to actually play.
