NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MoonSong" data-source="post: 5880442" data-attributes="member: 6689464">Just to clarify, I don't hate 4e, I just couldn't grasp it. (I stil can't) I found very hard to relearn everything from scratch,not just the mechanics, but the whole setting and flavour too. From a quick glance at the core the first thing I noticed was they had a very reduced class selection and since they killed multiclassing too I was unable to build anything resembling the bards, druids and sorcerers I'm used to play. Then the extremely streamlined skill system removed the fun of the rogues as the versatile skilled class (not to mention the loss of the perform skill and the removal of musical instruments from the equip list) and the healing surge system killed any potential fun I could have playing a cleric. Then PHB2 arrived and I noticed the Sorcerers are beyond recognition, and the bards not looking unique anymore (If I'm suppossed to be musical in nature and nowhere in the rules says how can I make music or even how can I have a non-magical musical instrument then where's your identity? How can I play a Bard if one of the key aspects of them is only supported by make believe? There would be no difference If I reskinned a Warlord or a Cleric to be "musical" and call it a bard. Rogues have streetwise, wizards Arcana and clerics Religion and all I get when I ask how good is my bard with bardy stuff is "make it up", that was disapointing). That compounded with the high need for learning every single term in the jargon before being able to sit and play, and the extremely codiffied nature of powers and no longer being able to just plain suck in combat but still be extremely usefull to the group outside of it. The only way I could enjoy playing 4e would be by severely refluffing a lot of things and houseruling away lots of things, not an easy task thank you as the system provided lots of crunch where I expected fluff and fluff where I was used to have crunch. Finally most 4e players enjoy it as is, which means that would only come at the price of disrupting soemone else's fun, so in short words I stayed with 3.5 because it was the less resistance path. Why go to the pain of retooling 4e to suit my tastes when I could just stay in 3.5 despite the miscelaneous (and sometimes awfull) problems it has? I like Pathfinder too, because I think It has the potential to be easier to teach to others and like some of the mechanical improvements, but I don't fully like the flavour it provides.As for what I don't mention 2e and before, simply because I'm too young to have played AD&D on it's prime, and the few things I learned from 2e back then weren't my cup of tea and came to me as too complex and even strange and inmersion breaking (racial level caps for example). The only time I really got into D&D was with 3e, when i first got my hands in the SRD It really made sense to me and it was the very first time I could really envisión playing characters that mapped well to the character sheet (because to me if the fluff isn't supported by mechanics or the mechanics get in the way of the flavor, then I'd rather ditch mechanics entirely and go freeform, that is another reason I don't play 4e, If the social part is run entirely freeform and I don't enjoy the combat stuff, then why play the system at all? Perhaps It could be just a tantrum on my part for the removal of Craft, Perform and profession, but still)But basically, I didn't see support to my playstyle with 4e and thus didn't feel compelled to make it suit my style, that is why I didn't switch. I hope Next really makes it possible for me to make the switch and bring new people to the hobby.</blockquote>

Verification