| User | Post |
|
4:46 pm February 24, 2009
| Matt_R
| | |
| Hero | posts 69 |
|
|
I DO love me some 3.0! I can't say that I know enough about 3.5 or 4.0 to judge them, but, I have heard some good things about 3.5 and some BAD things about 4.0. Seems like every time I get real familiar with a particular version of D&D they write a new one to make more money. I'm thinking I'll stick to 3.0 because the changes were a huge improvement to 2.0 that made game play more realistic and way more fun.
|
|
|
4:57 pm February 24, 2009
| Paranitis
| | Sacramento (Rosemont), CA | |
| Veteran | posts 46 |
|
|
There isn't a huge difference between 3.5 and 3.0, hence the reason they made it a .5 version. It's the same mechanics for the most part..just clarified a little bit and added a couple things.
4.0 though seems to be targetted at kids who like to play video games though. You gain a level, things happen automatically, and you keep going. D&D is supposed to be about customizability in your characters. You are supposed to make decisions about just how much knowledge your character has in certain things. I'm someone who will make a character with 7 points in a skill just to round it out to 10 (with stat bonus), and never put a point in it again..and other skills I will put points into it at every single level. 4.0 doesn't allow you that freedom. It says “you pick x amount of skills..okay, as you gain levels you are good at those skills and nothing else”.
It's too much like a video game for me like that. Pick some adventure video game (like Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, or maybe Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel) and you get to pick a character..and that character will always be that character that you picked from the start. It will become more powerful, but there's no bending anything. You are a stereotype, because that's all the video game will allow you to be. Same with 4.0 in my view.
Some people believe that 3.x was overly complicated, and that may be true, but I'd rather things be overly complicated rather than too simplified or I don't feel any kind of connection to my character.
*edit*
Also this should be in the 3.5 forum rather than the Older Versions forum. Adrian is a tool and doesn't realize that three comes before three and a half when counting. ;)
|
|
|
5:02 pm February 24, 2009
| Matt_R
| | |
| Hero | posts 69 |
|
|
Paranitis said:
There isn't a huge difference between 3.5 and 3.0, hence the reason they made it a .5 version. It's the same mechanics for the most part..just clarified a little bit and added a couple things.
4.0 though seems to be targetted at kids who like to play video games though. You gain a level, things happen automatically, and you keep going. D&D is supposed to be about customizability in your characters. You are supposed to make decisions about just how much knowledge your character has in certain things. I'm someone who will make a character with 7 points in a skill just to round it out to 10 (with stat bonus), and never put a point in it again..and other skills I will put points into it at every single level. 4.0 doesn't allow you that freedom. It says “you pick x amount of skills..okay, as you gain levels you are good at those skills and nothing else”.
It's too much like a video game for me like that. Pick some adventure video game (like Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, or maybe Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel) and you get to pick a character..and that character will always be that character that you picked from the start. It will become more powerful, but there's no bending anything. You are a stereotype, because that's all the video game will allow you to be. Same with 4.0 in my view.
Some people believe that 3.x was overly complicated, and that may be true, but I'd rather things be overly complicated rather than too simplified or I don't feel any kind of connection to my character.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I played Dark alliance and I am currently playing Champions of Norrath. Fun, but, limited. Your Characters should be able to get better at ANYTHING just like in real life. That's one of the many reasons I play Marvel Superheroes RPG. If you can think of it, you can do it.
|
|
|
6:54 pm February 24, 2009
| SkilGalen
| | |
| Admin
| posts 59 |
|
|
Thing is 3.5 to me doesn't seem that different to 4. There are some big surface changes for sure but it doesn't change the way most people play the same old game I played 20 years ago as a kid. I borrowed the 3.5 PHB and the difference is mainly in the character classes and races not being the same in 4, and each class has a set of about 100 at will, encounter, daily and utility powers that vary depending on the class. and replace the old spell system, some skills eg tumble.
Some changes, like with my character a Ranger, in 3.5 he has spells and Animal companion. In 4E the PHB has only ranged and two sword rangers, no magic, and no animal companion. They do have some wisdom based attacks but they aren't magic but skill and knowledge based power attacks, and have a lot of perception based advantages over other classes.
If you want to have an animal companion, the Martial Power source book has the Beasmaster Ranger Build which forfeits some of the feats built into the other two classes but gets the animal companion. I guess the martial power book came about because the new power system takes up a lot of room.
It's true that you are much more limited in skill training. Your either trained or not trained +5. After which your ability scores and level plus some feats etc play into it or training can be bought.
I personally don't think it's bad, but certainly different to what 3.x players are familiar with or used to. There really aren't very many source books out yet, and you can't even be a Bard or Druid till next month (about a year since 4E was released). So you are somewhat limited at this time. I expect 3.x players will grow into it slowly just like migrating from any other system that has been around a long time.
|
|
|
7:52 pm February 24, 2009
| Paranitis
| | Sacramento (Rosemont), CA | |
| Veteran | posts 46 |
|
|
4.0 was more about making money than making a good game. Proof is simply in not having 5 classes and 2 races transfer over versions without having to buy extra books to do so. There are 3 Core books. PHB, MM, and DMG. I'm sorry, but being forced to buy extra books to get what was once considered Core, is arrogant and greedy. That's the primary reason I will have nothing to do with 4.0.
|
|
|
8:07 pm February 24, 2009
| SkilGalen
| | |
| Admin
| posts 59 |
|
|
Any business has to make money. I don't think TSR was any different, they released 100's of books and modules. Much more than wizards, and you don't need to buy the extra books. BTW I noticed the new 4E books in the sacramento library catalogue along with a couple of dozen 3.x books. Most of the books that come out are just supplements you can use if you want. I don't see much need for them. I do think PHB2 will be worth getting.
You could play your own D&D game with a d6 and graph paper if you wanted. A bit grass roots. The rules are only there for those that want or need them, and to put everyone on the same page when they move from game to game with other players. Make of them what you like. Remember when the Magic user only got 1d4 hp. Each version of D&D gets more gamey, some might argue that 3.5 became too much of a spreadsheet and lost its way from the original game. 4E being an attempt to get back to its roots.
When I was a kid I was a big fan 'Elite' of the 8bit game for the BBC computer. Made a whole role playing game around it, a mix of the game, the novella that came with it and starwars :). Climbed up in the rafters of the garage and had some great times without any official rules. For me 80% the rules do are dictate and balance the fighting. The rest I pretty much leave to the DM to decide.
|
|
|
8:20 pm February 24, 2009
| Paranitis
| | Sacramento (Rosemont), CA | |
| Veteran | posts 46 |
|
|
Oh, I'm not against them making money, but my specific problem is about taking things that were core and then ripping them out and putting them in as an extra cost. I have no problem with the multiple books that the companies sell to add more and more into the game. But you shouldn't change what Core means just to make more money. PHB, MM, and DMG are Core. PHB2 and PHB3 are not Core.
I'm not even angry that they added some classes or races..I'm just angry that they kicked out some classes and races that a lot of people liked, so they can push "extra" races and classes on us that we could have chosen to buy in PHB2.
It's like how you can play a Fighter or Ranger or whatever class you want just by having the PHB, but if you want "more" out of it, you can decide to buy Complete Adventurer or something like that. Extra books should be for Extra items. Don't take previously Core items and turn then into Extras, especially when it means switching versions you suddenly just got a bunch of players not being able to play their characters anymore that want to be converted until a year after the version change. It's extremely inconsiderate to the playerbase.
Also Adrian, you are the admin..so can you move this thread to the 3.5 (and third edition) forum?
|
|
|
12:27 am February 25, 2009
| SkilGalen
| | |
| Admin
| posts 59 |
|
|
I know what you mean too. When we bought the PHB for 4E my wife wanted to be a Druid. In the end she settled for a modified cleric. That was quite disappointing and a frustration at first. For me the problem isn't so much that there is going to be a PHB2 it's that if they were going to spread everything out so much, they should have released the second book MUCH sooner. bards, Druids and I don't remember what else are popular and interesting choices.
I suppose with races and classes, they might have wanted to mix around the base ones this time around to make it feel different. The PHB is the largest book so I'm not sure they could have put much more in.
I have to say that I don't really care for the Dragonborne. I wasn't familiar with them having not played D&D in a while. When I first picked up the PHB I immediately thought video games and 'Mass Effect' in particular. With Elves and Half-Elves I wasn't sure a third variation in the Eladrin was needed in the basic player rules.
I will be placing my order for the PHB2 next month, but probably not much else for a while.
|
|
|
1:30 am February 25, 2009
| Paranitis
| | Sacramento (Rosemont), CA | |
| Veteran | posts 46 |
|
|
They removed Bard, Barbarian, Druid, Monk, and Sorcerer from Classes, with Gnomes and Half-Orcs from Races.
Dragonborne didn't exist in 3.x, other than as a Half-Dragon template through some "extra" book, or through being a Dragon Disciple prestige class. Eladrin also didn't exist as a playable race.
Also a major reason they didn't have the room to add these classes is that they wasted WAY too much room with the art needed to include the stupid powers in on each class. Where in 3.x it took maybe 4 pages total to explain a class, now it's like 10 pages per class because of the powers, then going into the level 10 and level 20 "extra" paths and whatnot. It's just bogged down is stuff that wasn't needed.
|
|
|
7:34 pm February 26, 2009
| Matt_R
| | |
| Hero | posts 69 |
|
|
admin said:
Any business has to make money. I don't think TSR was any different, they released 100's of books and modules. Much more than wizards, and you don't need to buy the extra books. BTW I noticed the new 4E books in the sacramento library catalogue along with a couple of dozen 3.x books. Most of the books that come out are just supplements you can use if you want. I don't see much need for them. I do think PHB2 will be worth getting.
You could play your own D&D game with a d6 and graph paper if you wanted. A bit grass roots. The rules are only there for those that want or need them, and to put everyone on the same page when they move from game to game with other players. Make of them what you like. Remember when the Magic user only got 1d4 hp. Each version of D&D gets more gamey, some might argue that 3.5 became too much of a spreadsheet and lost its way from the original game. 4E being an attempt to get back to its roots.
When I was a kid I was a big fan 'Elite' of the 8bit game for the BBC computer. Made a whole role playing game around it, a mix of the game, the novella that came with it and starwars :). Climbed up in the rafters of the garage and had some great times without any official rules. For me 80% the rules do are dictate and balance the fighting. The rest I pretty much leave to the DM to decide.
I also think that the rules are there to help the DM settle any disputes between Characters who can't agree on some things. They are, and have always been, GUIDELINES. LONG LIVE THJE EXECUTIVE POWERS OF THE DM!!!!
|
|
|
7:36 pm February 26, 2009
| Matt_R
| | |
| Hero | posts 69 |
|
|
Paranitis said:
Also Adrian, you are the admin..so can you move this thread to the 3.5 (and third edition) forum?
Still harping on Adrian for being a tool? HA HA
|
|
|
7:38 pm February 26, 2009
| Matt_R
| | |
| Hero | posts 69 |
|
|
Paranitis said:
They removed Bard, Barbarian, Druid, Monk, and Sorcerer from Classes, with Gnomes and Half-Orcs from Races.
As I recall, Barbarian was originally an add on from Dragon magazine (wow I am really dating myself there!).
|
|
|
9:20 pm February 26, 2009
| Paranitis
| | Sacramento (Rosemont), CA | |
| Veteran | posts 46 |
|
|
Matt_R said:
Paranitis said:
They removed Bard, Barbarian, Druid, Monk, and Sorcerer from Classes, with Gnomes and Half-Orcs from Races.
As I recall, Barbarian was originally an add on from Dragon magazine (wow I am really dating myself there!).
I started playing with 3.0..well, actually I started playing through Baldur's Gate on PC (2E) and Pool of Radiance on PC (3E), and I've never read one of those magazines.
But see, that's a perfect example of what I was trying to say about what's wrong with 4.0. Barbarian didn't exist before 3.0, but they added it as core, without removing anything (that I am aware of). 4.0 on the other hand decided to remove 7 large parts of what was 3.0 core, so they can add their own crap. They should have kept the 3.0 core stuff AND added their crap.
|
|