Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Metus" data-source="post: 4926592" data-attributes="member: 185">I'm sort of in the boat as Kamikaze Midget in that I'm glad 4e has some changes that 3e needed, but I don't like other 4e changes.For me, I was all excited about 3rd edition when it was coming out, and out of scale of enjoyment of 1-10, when 3rd edition first came out it was a 9 for me.&nbsp; Loved it.With 4th edition, I was wary, but I started getting more and more stoked, more excited.&nbsp; When it came out, I was crushingly disappointed, as it basically seemed like an MMORPG (not necessarily WoW) in paper form.That being said, I've found that after seeing 4e, I can't go back to 3e due to the (now) glaring flaws that exist in the system, and exist even in Pathfinder.&nbsp; Yet at the same time, I'm not really blown away by 4e.&nbsp; When 4e first came out, it was a 4/10 for me, now a 5.&nbsp; 3rd edition is now a 4/10.I remember a poster from a previous edition comparison thread mentioning that 4e has improved on enough so that 3rd edition looks shabby, but 4e problems make it look shabby as well.&nbsp; I'm the same, and so now I have no D&amp;D that I like.&nbsp; To compound the issue, I don't even like the alternative systems, as I hate-hate-hate-hate WFRP (the funky, over-the-top setting and starting as a rat-catcher and &quot;improving&quot; to different &quot;jobs&quot;?&nbsp; No thank you) and other fantasy RPGs I've seen.I play 4e for that 1 point of improvement on the enjoyment scale it has over 3rd edition, and I'm getting ready to run War of the Burning Sky, which looks great, so there's that.But yeah, I understand what you're saying, OP.&nbsp; 4e is okay, I play it and I prefer it over 3rd edition, but it has a lot of problems that both bother and sadden me.It is very interesting to see how 4e is going with all the other ENWorlders out there, now that there's been some time to really play it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Metus, post: 4926592, member: 185"] I'm sort of in the boat as Kamikaze Midget in that I'm glad 4e has some changes that 3e needed, but I don't like other 4e changes. For me, I was all excited about 3rd edition when it was coming out, and out of scale of enjoyment of 1-10, when 3rd edition first came out it was a 9 for me. Loved it. With 4th edition, I was wary, but I started getting more and more stoked, more excited. When it came out, I was crushingly disappointed, as it basically seemed like an MMORPG (not necessarily WoW) in paper form. That being said, I've found that after seeing 4e, I can't go back to 3e due to the (now) glaring flaws that exist in the system, and exist even in Pathfinder. Yet at the same time, I'm not really blown away by 4e. When 4e first came out, it was a 4/10 for me, now a 5. 3rd edition is now a 4/10. I remember a poster from a previous edition comparison thread mentioning that 4e has improved on enough so that 3rd edition looks shabby, but 4e problems make it look shabby as well. I'm the same, and so now I have no D&D that I like. To compound the issue, I don't even like the alternative systems, as I hate-hate-hate-hate WFRP (the funky, over-the-top setting and starting as a rat-catcher and "improving" to different "jobs"? No thank you) and other fantasy RPGs I've seen. I play 4e for that 1 point of improvement on the enjoyment scale it has over 3rd edition, and I'm getting ready to run War of the Burning Sky, which looks great, so there's that. But yeah, I understand what you're saying, OP. 4e is okay, I play it and I prefer it over 3rd edition, but it has a lot of problems that both bother and sadden me. It is very interesting to see how 4e is going with all the other ENWorlders out there, now that there's been some time to really play it. [/QUOTE]

Verification