We're pondering switching back to 3.5

[Name Lips]

There are some things about D&D 4.0 I really like.
There are some things about D&D 3.5 I really like.

The problem is that there are aspects of both systems I really don't like either.

Right now I'm just getting my thoughts down. I remember I had certain concerns and problems running 3.5 that I think nostalgia is making me overlook.

So let's do the pros first

3.5 Pros
Extreme customization - virtually any character concept can be created and played.
Characters feel unique (direct counter to the con of 4.0 in which every character, even of different classes, feel similar because they all follow the same at-will/encounter/daily power model).
Lots of source material available for free (OGL)
Already have loads of books (no ongoing expense)
Everybody familiar with rules
Lots of "flavor-rich" spells and magic items
Already have good character/monster/statblock generator (E-Tools)

3.5 Cons
Feat/Spell/PrC bloat
DM prep time (why spend 15 minutes on an NPC who's going to die in 2 rounds?)
Extreme power difference between the min-maxers and the others
PCs so unique that nobody but their own player knows all the involved rules.
Lots of near-useless feats/skills/items - easy for non min-maxers to pick "cool" stuff and end up with ineffective characters
Grapple rules
Difficult to create a character who fits your vision at 1st level - character visions always built around what they're going to look like around 10th level or higher.

4.0 Pros
DM prep time - can throw together full-fledged encounters in minutes
Minions
Skill Challenges (I really, really like these)
Streamlined skill system
Balanced
"defensive" attributes instead of saving throws (kind of like keeping the same "attack vs set number" mechanic for all attacks)
Simplified 50/50 "saving throw" mechanic to end all ongoing effects.
Virtually impossible to make an ineffective character.
Integrated rules carrying characters to level 30.
Lack of bloat (so far).
Simplified and easy-to-run monsters.

4.0 Cons
Cookie-cutter feel - all characters feel very similar mechanics-wise.
At-Will/Encounter/Daily mechanic feels arbitrarily forced on most characters
Feels MMO-ish (I know a lot of people criticized this ahead of time, but I wanted to see if it felt that way in practice. It does. Even when I ignore a lot of the video-game isms from the DMG).
Difficult to min/max (pro and con, really, but highlights the lack of customization)
Spells and magic items feel bland instead of powerful and mysterious.
Rituals feel "tossed in" to compensate for bland spells (miss that 3.5 spell? Make a ritual for it!)
Feels a bit sad that all characters are balanced solely and entirely around their combat effectiveness (I made characters in 3.5 who were useless in combat but quite effective the rest of the time).
Cost - most books remain unpublished, DDI requires subscription, etc.

----------------------------------


I'm sure I missed a few things. I'm sure, looking at that list, a lot of you would suggest to switch to the 3.5 rules and just include the aspects of 4.0 I like (except the combat/defenses stuff which would be a pain). However, as much as possible I'd like to avoid making a complicated 3.5/4.0 bastardization. Part of the point is to be able to hand people a book and say "this is what we're playing."

The DM-prep stuff would be easy enough to incorporate, such as simplified NPCs with just 2 or 3 combat abilities, minions, and so on. As a DM I can pull in a 4.0 monster and just play it, converting things on the fly (Yeah, I'm that awesome! :tongue:).

Some players have expressed interest in running other systems, but I'm a bit leery of switching. They all seem to want to re-live the Great Systems of the past, all of which are out of print or obscure. If I can't have a physical book for every player at the table it is kind of a pain. Some people have suggested switching to True20, but I don't really see that as worth the trouble.

I have to admit one of the biggest draws of 3.5 right now is the fact that I have over 40 3.5 books within 5' of me. The investment has been made - we have everything we need for literally endless adventure. We even have enough spare PHBs for new players, if somehow they become hard to come by new.

[Harry]

My group went from 3.x with all books allowed to Castles & Crusades, and were quite happy with C&C for a long while. New DM, though, so we went back to 3.5, but we are doing 3.5 straight - no additional books period. Everything is from the core three, not even UA. We are quite satisfied for the time being, although I might press for UA if this campaign ends. [UA can't come into a game midstream.]

[Name Lips]

The main problem I remember having is that players would get bored with core, but opening it up to everything else made it too large and complex. There are lots of spells and feats and items that were never intended to be put together on the same character. But if I limit it to core rules only, that's a huge number of books that we own and don't use. And that seems like a waste.

[Megamieuwsel]

The main problem I remember having is that players would get bored with core
That means the DM needs to shape up...
..and the players need to light up...

[Name Lips]

Maybe limit individual characters to "core plus one book."



More thinking:

4.0 Pro
Team-based - many powers and abilities complement each other nicely between classes.

4.0 Con
Many characters incapable of holding their own - i.e., solo side-quests are less feasible.

[Janos]

Maybe limit individual characters to "core plus one book."

We have frequently limited it to Core + Complete books (either the 4 basic or 7 total ones) and ignored the environmental books, monster books, etc. Dropping UA in particular removes a lot of the over-uniqueness that can make handing a character to another player a pain in the butt.

[Schizm]

We have frequently limited it to Core + Complete books (either the 4 basic or 7 total ones) and ignored the environmental books, monster books, etc. Dropping UA in particular removes a lot of the over-uniqueness that can make handing a character to another player a pain in the butt.

I'm actually fairly in favor of this approach. Core + 4 basic complete books is

And nix the spell & magic item compendiums, because they're just WAY the fuck too easy to abuse.

presto!

[Name Lips]

Our 4.0 game... Emerald wanted to play a weather/storm based mage, and set about trying to build one in the system. That was a short-lived experiment. She changed the flavor of some spells to lightning... but other than that, how much can you do with the core rules? Not much.

[obryn]

We are taking a quick segue into Call of Cthulhu for a few sessions, but I was surprised at how enthusiastic my players are to get back into 4e. So, we're going back to that campaign after a few more Call of Cthulhu sessions. It should be fun. :)

-O

[Limper]

blah, blah doesn't matter to the taunting
-O

Hahahahahahahahaha! You're tribe has dwindled!

[doc]

Will PHB 2 for 4.0 help or is it more of the same ?

[obryn]

Hahahahahahahahaha! You're tribe has dwindled!
You are tribe has dwindled?

-O

[Trainz]

Will PHB 2 for 4.0 help or is it more of the same ?

More of the same AFAIK. Just new classes, not new mechanics.

What would be great is if WotC or a third party publisher would present a book à la Unearthed Arcana, offering different mechanics for those of us who would like 4th ed to be different.

[Harry]

Our 4.0 game... Emerald wanted to play a weather/storm based mage, and set about trying to build one in the system. That was a short-lived experiment. She changed the flavor of some spells to lightning... but other than that, how much can you do with the core rules? Not much.

Uhm, don't play a Wizard? If you want the weather spells, play a Druid or a Cleric.

We are really having a ball playing basic Core, but then.... Besides the DM, I'm the only 3.x veteran. The other players have extensive roleplaying backgrounds, but the last time any of them played D&D was 2nd Edition, so 3.5 is completely and utterly new to them. That's why Wes decided to stay strictly core. For a group of gals who've only ever played 1st and 2nd Editions, 3.5 has plenty of nifty toys. [Yep, gals. I'm the token male. 4 women, me, + the DM. Gotta say, these women are vicious, too.]

[doc]

More of the same AFAIK. Just new classes, not new mechanics.

What would be great is if WotC or a third party publisher would present a book à la Unearthed Arcana, offering different mechanics for those of us who would like 4th ed to be different. Wouldn't WOTC raise a stink ?

Uhm, don't play a Wizard? If you want the weather spells, play a Druid or a Cleric.

We are really having a ball playing basic Core, but then.... Besides the DM, I'm the only 3.x veteran. The other players have extensive roleplaying backgrounds, but the last time any of them played D&D was 2nd Edition, so 3.5 is completely and utterly new to them. That's why Wes decided to stay strictly core. For a group of gals who've only ever played 1st and 2nd Editions, 3.5 has plenty of nifty toys. [Yep, gals. I'm the token male. 4 women, me, + the DM. Gotta say, these women are vicious, too.] You're in heaven aren't you :)

[Trainz]

Uhm, don't play a Wizard? If you want the weather spells, play a Druid or a Cleric.

We are really having a ball playing basic Core, but then.... Besides the DM, I'm the only 3.x veteran. The other players have extensive roleplaying backgrounds, but the last time any of them played D&D was 2nd Edition, so 3.5 is completely and utterly new to them. That's why Wes decided to stay strictly core. For a group of gals who've only ever played 1st and 2nd Editions, 3.5 has plenty of nifty toys. [Yep, gals. I'm the token male. 4 women, me, + the DM. Gotta say, these women are vicious, too.]

They're all 2nd ed vets?

What I considered, is to take my 2nd ed books and sprinkle a healthy dose of 4th ed in it. From my POV, that would be cool...

Where 4th ed did right IMHO is races and feats, which I would apply to 2nd ed. The simplicity of 2nd ed has a lot to give.

[Bagpuss]

4.0 Pro
Team-based - many powers and abilities complement each other nicely between classes.

4.0 Con
Many characters incapable of holding their own - i.e., solo side-quests are less feasible.

To me that is too pro's. I hate it when one player hogs the limelight to the expense of others.

The main pro for me as a DM is prep-time and the fact that everything to run the monsters/npcs is in their stat block. I wouldn't want to go back at all. As a player I wouldn't mind as much.

Heck I'm preparing for Star Wars SAGA now and that is a real pain in comparison. You get a NPC or creature and it has some feat (and/or Talent in SWSE case) and you have to go look up what it means somewhere else. Very annoying.

DM Prep time is the deciding factor for me, I'll do 3rd Ed again, but only if you could promise I could TPK the party at about 6th level then start back at 1st again. After about that level 3rd Edition become unwieldy.

[Bagpuss]

Our 4.0 game... Emerald wanted to play a weather/storm based mage, and set about trying to build one in the system. That was a short-lived experiment. She changed the flavor of some spells to lightning... but other than that, how much can you do with the core rules? Not much.

Exactly the same could be said for 3.5. Weather/storm based stuff is mainly the job of clerics and druids in that edition.

[cnath.rm]

We are really having a ball playing basic Core, but then.... Besides the DM, I'm the only 3.x veteran. The other players have extensive roleplaying backgrounds, but the last time any of them played D&D was 2nd Edition, so 3.5 is completely and utterly new to them. That's why Wes decided to stay strictly core. For a group of gals who've only ever played 1st and 2nd Editions, 3.5 has plenty of nifty toys. [Yep, gals. I'm the token male. 4 women, me, + the DM. Gotta say, these women are vicious, too.]Congrats! despite the vicious tendencies, it can be an improvement. :)

oh, and as it had to be done and nobody had yet, post pix pls.

[Ancalagon]

Some players have expressed interest in running other systems, but I'm a bit leery of switching. They all seem to want to re-live the Great Systems of the past, all of which are out of print or obscure.

Warhammer frpg 2nd ed. It's not that obscure, it's easy to run, and it's "proven" - several people have played it and liked it.

I'm going to run a game this summer using the system but outside the warhammer setting. I will let you guys know how it goes.

edit: I'll also point out that some of your pro/cons are almost direct consequence of each other. "extreme customization" (a pro) directly leads to the min/maxing (a con).

[Name Lips]

I don't know. Surely every RPG on the market right now can't be utter drek. Why not play something new? Why not help the industry by supporting current artists and writers? Why not pick something nobody in the group has tried - and experience that feeling of exploring new territory together?

That's what Emerald is leaning towards. My main reason to go 3.5 is that it's open-ended, endlessly customizable, familiar, has infinite supplements available already, and we already own tons of books for it.

But I have to admit it is sort of intriguing... the concept of playing something nobody at the table knows anything about.

[Radu]

That can be fun, but I think it comes down to priorities.

How much money do you want to spend? You're going to need the books for whatever system you use, and that's going to cost you.

How much time do you all want to spend learning the game? New game systems, however streamlined they may be, all take time to digest.

How many resources does the game provide for streamlining play? Are there generators, decision flowcharts, consolidated indexes, etc?

Finally, does the game you are interested in focus on stories you and your group enjoy? There's no question that certain systems support certain styles better than others. A lot of the built in assumptions of the game are really hard to figure out right away unless the design is pretty transparent.

If you do decide to go with the whole new game approach, here's a few suggestions for one's I've enjoyed:

Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay - simple rules for lighthearted dungeon crawls.

Ars Magica - troupe style roleplaying in a hyper-immersive mythical Europe.

Shadowrun 4th ed - magi-punk at its finest. I prefer to play it without any magic at all except physical adepts and technomancers for a more cyberpunk feeling, but it can be a lot of fun with everything thrown in.

Dogs in the Vineyard - nothing, and I mean nothing, encourages deep character RP better than this game. Great for story-dominant groups.

Mutants and Masterminds - the greatest game EVER! It can literally handle any genre, any style, any power level, and handle it with panache and simplicity. Absolutely my favorite RPG.

[Dr_Avalanche]

Burning Wheel! (www.burningwheel.org/)

[doc]

Is RuneQuest still being published ? Bunnies and Burrows ?

[Dr_Avalanche]

A new edition of Runequest was published by Mongoose in 2006.

[doc]

A new edition of Runequest was published by Mongoose in 2006.

But does it have Ducks ? I like ducks

[Dacke]

But does it have Ducks ? I like ducks
The core book has ducks as much as it has elves and dwarfs. That is, the book assumes you're playing a human, but it does have stats for them.

[Edena_of_Neith]

Just to simplistically put it here ... I wish 3rd edition / 4th edition hybrid games were easier to do.

EDIT: I thought that was a very good assessment of 3rd Edition's pros and cons, Name Lips.

[Name Lips]

On the other hand, I've found a wonderful use for 4th edition. Seems my kids want me to run a D&D game for them. My 7 year old can more or less play properly, and my 4 year old daughter is playing too. We made her a unicorn fighter. She keeps breaking down giggling when townspeople exclaim that they've never seen a unicorn before. :tongue:

[doc]

On the other hand, I've found a wonderful use for 4th edition. Seems my kids want me to run a D&D game for them. My 7 year old can more or less play properly, and my 4 year old daughter is playing too. We made her a unicorn fighter. She keeps breaking down giggling when townspeople exclaim that they've never seen a unicorn before. :tongue:

a unicorn ?? what's the 7 yo playing ?

[Name Lips]

a unicorn ?? what's the 7 yo playing ?

The "unicorn" has the exact stats of a human fighter. But her power cards are labeled "Attack with Hooves" or "Stab with Horn."

My unicorn mini is one of my oldest (dating from my teenage years), and the horn was already half broken and most of the paint is chipped off. Now it's facing a little girl who insists on using it to dramatically act out every attack, stabbing and smashing the dice that represent monsters.

My son is playing a Dragonborn Paladin. He lays out all his cards and ponders his tactical decisions very carefully. He likes the powers that heal people, and insists on shooting monsters with his crossbow whenever he can, even though its his weakest attack.

Emerald is playing a Tiefling Warlock.

[doc]

Sounds like a good group :), I wish I could DM my kidlet and her friends

[Trainz]

Sounds like a good group :), I wish I could DM my kidlet and her friends

Is it just me or this looks weird???

[Radu]

That is awesome. 4e may indeed be the best system to use to introduce the kiddos to RPG's-- it's pretty simple, streamlined, but enjoyable, and whats more important, you can play WITH your kids. I know for a fact I wouldn't enjoy RPG's nearly as much now if I hadn't been involved in a really cool group with one of my middle school buddies. His dad was the GM, and he would let us come over and paint miniatures, help him with game prep, etc. When we weren't gaming, I'd chill with my friend watching movies and listening to music and stuff.

[Utrecht]

I'm going to run a game this summer using the system but outside the warhammer setting. I will let you guys know how it goes.

I am considereing running a 3.5 campaign in the Warhammer setting. :)

Another interesting alternative is the Warhammer 40k Dark Heresy RPG - love the setting.

[doc]

Is it just me or this looks weird???
How so ???? When I had visitation with the kidlet last weekend she told me her friend Jason (11) played DnD with his older brothers and he told her about the game.

[Trainz]

How so ???? When I had visitation with the kidlet last weekend she told me her friend Jason (11) played DnD with his older brothers and he told her about the game.

You don't understand... look at the attached screen cap and where the smiley is. That's how it looked like to me last night. A bug.

Now it's fine.

[doc]

You don't understand... look at the attached screen cap and where the smiley is. That's how it looked like to me last night. A bug.

Now it's fine.

:) gotcha

[Ancalagon]

The "unicorn" has the exact stats of a human fighter. But her power cards are labeled "Attack with Hooves" or "Stab with Horn."

My unicorn mini is one of my oldest (dating from my teenage years), and the horn was already half broken and most of the paint is chipped off. Now it's facing a little girl who insists on using it to dramatically act out every attack, stabbing and smashing the dice that represent monsters.

My son is playing a Dragonborn Paladin. He lays out all his cards and ponders his tactical decisions very carefully. He likes the powers that heal people, and insists on shooting monsters with his crossbow whenever he can, even though its his weakest attack.

Emerald is playing a Tiefling Warlock.

That sounds really fun :)