X4: Master of the Desert Nomads - OOC

[Leif]

Perhaps, but there were A LOT of rules back then that few people used. Weapon damage vrs Smal/Medium and weapon damage vrs Large creatures was different, so you had to plan for that. Weapon Speed Factors. Etc. Most people never played with those rules.

Yes, I never used speed factors, well a few times, but it just wasn't worth the hassle. But Scimitars did 1-8 vs. S/M opponents AND 1-8 vs. L oppenents. Maces did 2-7 vs. S/M, and 1-6 vs. L. Longswords did 1-8 vs. S/M and 1-12 vs. L, which made the longsword EVERYBODY'S weapon of choice, if their character could use one. 3.5 is MUCH more democratic to the rest of the weapons chart, and this is a very good thing.

This made a Druid, weilding a scimitar, more effective against a large opponent like an ogre, than a cleric weilding a mace, because he did 1-8 damage as opposed to 1-6 for the cleric. It may not seem like much difference now, but at the time it seemed like a big ol' difference to me.

In 3E, druids are still generally considered stronger than clerics, and I think that is for their wildshape ability. Clerics have the upper hand in spells, in my opinion. And 4E I wouldn't know about.

Not sure if I agree with this or not if you take wildshape out of the equation. 4E? Well, I've tried to get you interested!

Righteous Might + Divine Power FTW!

 

[Rhun]

Yes, I never used speed factors, well a few times, but it just wasn't worth the hassle. But Scimitars did 1-8 vs. S/M opponents AND 1-8 vs. L oppenents. Maces did 2-7 vs. S/M, and 1-6 vs. L. Longswords did 1-8 vs. S/M and 1-12 vs. L, which made the longsword EVERYBODY'S weapon of choice, if their character could use one. 3.5 is MUCH more democratic to the rest of the weapons chart, and this is a very good thing.

This made a Druid, weilding a scimitar, more effective against a large opponent like an ogre, than a cleric weilding a mace, because he did 1-8 damage as opposed to 1-6 for the cleric. It may not seem like much difference now, but at the time it seemed like a big ol' difference to me.

Well, much more effective is open to interpration, as a 1d8 vrs 1d6 is only a single point of damage on average (3.5 vrs 4.5). And 2-7 vrs 1-8 has the same average damage. Also, there were rules charts as to how weapons performed against certain types of armor and ACs...which could have changed the dynamic too, if you used those rules.

4E? Well, I've tried to get you interested!

Sorry man, no real interest. From what I've seen of 4E on these boards, there is a lot I really don't like. One of these days I might cave, though. We'll have to see.

 

[Leif]

Well, much more effective is open to interpration, as a 1d8 vrs 1d6 is only a single point of damage on average (3.5 vrs 4.5). And 2-7 vrs 1-8 has the same average damage. Also, there were rules charts as to how weapons performed against certain types of armor and ACs...which could have changed the dynamic too, if you used those rules.

Yes, the weapon vs. AC table was consigned to the scrap heap along with weapon speed factors. And one thing that made that difficult to use was that it didn't take magical enhancements or dex adjustments into account, it was only based on the type of actual armor worn, so it could only be used effectively by the DM, not players, who had no knowledge of certain necessary info. This just made a big headache for the DM, for very precious little gain. And, like I said, it SEEMED significant at the time. Remember, I was about 12 or 13 then.

Sorry man, no real interest. From what I've seen of 4E on these boards, there is a lot I really don't like. One of these days I might cave, though. We'll have to see.

Have it your way. But there are really, truly at least as many improvements to the game as there are troublesome spots. Actually, to tell the truth, I haven't seen any of these supposed "trouble spots" in either 3.5 or 4E. They're just different games and they are not directly comparable. If you evaluate each on its own terms, which is really the only fair way to do things, then I think that both emerge from the comparison spotless and as winners! I want BOTH!!!

 

[renau1g]

Agreed. I play 4e in RL and 3.5e here on the boards, besides the occasional game I run for my wife and friend (it's really slowed down in the last few months, stupid work).

 

[Rhun]

Yes, the weapon vs. AC table was consigned to the scrap heap along with weapon speed factors. And one thing that made that difficult to use was that it didn't take magical enhancements or dex adjustments into account, it was only based on the type of actual armor worn, so it could only be used effectively by the DM, not players, who had no knowledge of certain necessary info. This just made a big headache for the DM, for very precious little gain. And, like I said, it SEEMED significant at the time. Remember, I was about 12 or 13 then.

I'm not saying I used them much either...just pointing out that they were there, and that if they were actually used it changed combat quite a bit. If I started throwing out 3E rules, I could change combat a lot too.

Have it your way. But there are really, truly at least as many improvements to the game as there are troublesome spots. Actually, to tell the truth, I haven't seen any of these supposed "trouble spots" in either 3.5 or 4E. They're just different games and they are not directly comparable. If you evaluate each on its own terms, which is really the only fair way to do things, then I think that both emerge from the comparison spotless and a winners! I want BOTH!!!

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with 4E. It just seems very "video-gamey" for lack of a better term. It took me several years after 3E was out to switch to it...so it may just take me a while to switch to 4E too.

 

[kinem]

Personally, I don't much like wildshape, I don't like summoning spells, and I don't like animal companions.

But druids? They still kick ass in 3.5 or Pathfinder. They have a great spell list with the spell compendium, decent combat ability, and other abilities. I like the idea of an elementalist druid, which I built in Pathfinder for a game that never got off the ground here.

4e? My views are well known I would think. Not simulationist enough, no interesting magic (it all just does damage or moves people around the chess board), and not what I call D&D.

 

[renau1g]

I'm not saying I used them much either...just pointing out that they were there, and that if they were actually used it changed combat quite a bit. If I started throwing out 3E rules, I could change combat a lot too.

I used those rules back in the day, the speed factor, etc. I played BGII before I actually played D&D so I kind of got used to those things and our DM was pretty interested in having those rules in place. It made things interesting and I carried a variety of weapons depending on our foe. It was cool.

 

[Leif]

Personally, I don't much like wildshape, I don't like summoning spells, and I don't like animal companions..

Let's see, you hate Wildshape [Girgal}, Summoning Spells [Bevin], and animal companions [Girgal again]. So the only players in the game that you like are Aram and Father Fuller???? I'm calling the EEOC!!

I'm not saying I used them much either...just pointing out that they were there, and that if they were actually used it changed combat quite a bit. If I started throwing out 3E rules, I could change combat a lot too.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with 4E. It just seems very "video-gamey" for lack of a better term. It took me several years after 3E was out to switch to it...so it may just take me a while to switch to 4E too.

I think the whole idea is for 4E to be more "video gamey", to compete with video games like World of Warcraft. My cousin's husband is heavily into WoW, and was showing me how to play. I told him, this is just like D&D! You ought to let me show you how to play that! He said, "But is D&D all just 'text based'? Nahhh, not interested. I like to SEE the mosters die!" But, truly, the descriptive attack effects that are in 4E should probably be applied to 3.5E as well, because more colorful descriptions would make the game much more interesting than, "You did 12 hp damage." But, ENWorld has gone a long way towards helping that transformation occur, because when you have to write out descriptions for EVERYTHING as you must do on the Boards to get your point across, it forces DMs to reach down deep in their cavernous brains and come out with some just pretty cool stuff.

Agreed. I play 4e in RL and 3.5e here on the boards, besides the occasional game I run for my wife and friend (it's really slowed down in the last few months, stupid work).

Yeah, I think you should just quit. Tell you're wife that if she supports you, then you'll have LOTS more time to DM for her! Who knows, she might buy it!

I used those rules back in the day, the speed factor, etc. I played BGII before I actually played D&D so I kind of got used to those things and our DM was pretty interested in having those rules in place. It made things interesting and I carried a variety of weapons depending on our foe. It was cool.

BGII????

 

[renau1g]

Let's see, you hate Wildshape [Girgal}, Summoning Spells [Bevin], and animal companions [Girgal again]. So the only players in the game that you like are Aram and Father Fuller???? I'm calling the EEOC!!

Excellent. I'm glad to be in the good column again (Rajah was clearly a summoner/companion type)

Yeah, I think you should just quit. Tell you're wife that if she supports you, then you'll have LOTS more time to DM for her! Who knows, she might buy it!

If only the bank didn't make us pay them back all that money we owe them for our house I'd be all set... I need a government bailout like GM

BGII????

Baldur's Gate II, my favourite CRPG on the PC. It used the 2e rules, but added some other things like barbarians & monks. Great story, interesting NPC's, hours and hours of side-quests...yes lots of fun.

 

[Leif]

Excellent. I'm glad to be in the good column again (Rajah was clearly a summoner/companion type)

Ooops, I forgot all about Rajah, but you're right!

If only the bank didn't make us pay them back all that money we owe them for our house I'd be all set... I need a government bailout like GM

Hey! NOT like GM!! Get YOUR OWN government to bail you out!!! We Americans have enough problems of our own, trust me.

Baldur's Gate II, my favourite CRPG on the PC. It used the 2e rules, but added some other things like barbarians & monks. Great story, interesting NPC's, hours and hours of side-quests...yes lots of fun.

Oh, wow! Is it online or do you buy a cd somewhere?