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="Hussar" data-source="post: 6015629" data-attributes="member: 22779">But that's the thing.  The people who didn't have problems in 3e were the people who were already following that specific playstyle that I outlined in my points above.  So, sure, 3e supports that style of player very well.  However, if you don't follow that advice, you start having problems.  Thus any play outside of that very narrow playstyle is less and less supported the further you get from those points.IOW, 3e was every bit as limited as 4e.  The only difference is, 4e wasn't coy about it.  It straight up said, "Do this for best results."  3e didn't.  3e pretended to be all things to everyone, but, when the rubber meets the road, suddenly we're locked into a very narrow playstyle and anything else results in poorer games./edit to addTo expand on my point.  If I do the following: <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">No time limits on adventures.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Players decide pacing of adventures</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Players are free to choose any option they qualify for.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">High level play</li> </ul>my game is going to go kerblooie.  It's going to be Angel Summoner and BMX bandit.  The casters are going to have an absolute field day and the non-casters are going to be riding the pines.  Yet, the style I just outlined there is very, very common.  Sandbox play is predicated on the first three options.  And none of this is because the players or DM are being jerks.  It's a consequence of the mechanics.</blockquote>

Verification