Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="StarFyre" data-source="post: 5833985" data-attributes="member: 26055">After friends and I tried 4e for a while, we came across an issue (well, what we thought as an issue):In our style of game (and my style of DM'ing) any rule will be broken/put aside in favour of story and what seems fun for the players.  (mainly fun factor actually) My players, being a heavy actor/simulationist style group, would try stuff that makes sense, but rulewise, it would make certain 4e powers (and even 3.5e) feats pointless (since they are something that their character would be able to do on a whim anyways).  What this meant was, we were just adhocing stuff as we saw fit (and they prefer that).  It makes the game a lot faster as well, but it's not for everyone. (a couple of my group are pro a very structured game like 4e or a video game or even a board game and they werent too happy about it but deal with it since they like to play moreso than the care for the system)What this resulted in was ignoring the rules completely for some stuff or just layers of house rules.We then compared the house rules we use, and we ended up using less in 3.5e, so we ended up switching back to 3.5e/pathfinder and are quite happy.To be fair, i think 4e is a good system, but it totally depends on the play style of the players.  For me/my group; 4e just won't work; if a game system is supposed to be pretty much exactly balanced, and your players want to ignore all that for the sake of fun/story, etc, then the system just has no use to that group (balance only matters, if the effects of the apparent non-balance is adversly affecting the players), and if 5e doesn't work as well for them either (won't know until it's released and we try it), we'll still stick with 3.5e/pathfinder.Sanjay</blockquote>

Verification