Poll: Dungeons and Dragons question

[KefkaCultist]

My D&D group does 3.5 edition right now, but the other day the dungeon master told me that we may switch to 4th edition.

I don't like this idea because all I know is 3rd edition and 3.5 and I've heard a few things about 4th that I didn't like the sound of. Plus I have about 5 books for 3.5 so it kind of sucks that if we go to 4th that I would need to get all new books.

So DnD playing Escapists, what edition of DnD do you like the most? And should I suggest to my DM to stick with 3.5 or move on to 4th edition?

 

[Drakenian]

I prefer 3.5, solely because it allows for more in-depth role playing. 4.0 is more centered on combat, and, from what I've heard, the classes and the combat itself sounds pretty cool. I'd say try out a 4.0 game once, then decide if you guys prefer it over 3.5.

 

[Swaki]

i have only tried DnD 3 times and it was version 3, and i had fun with it but i was just sitting in because i stayed with a friend who was the DM, for some reason i never continued playing, but maybe if it sucks you could try a new DM instead of going out to invest in all new books, judging from your previous miniature thread forgive me for assuming that you may not have a ton of disposable income, or try and find some of the free flavour quests you can find online.

completely off topic: does a "lion" bar have nuts in it, cause im itching like crazy and im about to loose it.

 

[SniperMacFox]

In all honesty, it doesn't really matter which version of D&D that you play. The real fun from the experience comes entirely from the DM, the rulebooks are more... guidelines then actual rules that should be followed in friendly D&D sessions.

I've DM'ed with both versions and personally I prefer 3.5 for it's flexability that it gives me, but 4th edition is also so much easier to pick up and play that it means it's a lot easier to structure a campaign around.

Also, Lion bar's do not have nuts in them, but they are made in a factory where nuts are.

 

[Zykon TheLich]

2nd edition is all I've ever been familiar with and it was fine for me.

 

[xavierxenon]

Having only played D&D for a few weeks before my GM said fuck it as she was bored of it, I can't really say what I prefer aside from 3.5

I can however say that EVERYONE in the games society refuses to acknowledge 4th edition.

 

[Owlslayer]

I've played a lot of 3.5 and i like the rules. There are a lot of them, but still. Quite a lot of fun. I've played a bit of 3.0 too, bud i feel that it lacks something...
And I've heard mixed things about 4.0, though i myself would love to try it out. The others in my gaming group...not so much.

 

[darksaber64x]

I'd vote but I kinda prefer *most* of the Pathfinder rules over DnD 3.5, but I personally do carry over some of the DnD 3.5 rules into the game.

We all kinda fudge the rules here and there anyway. =) So if I had to pick one from your list, it'd be 3.5.

I like the changes to the saves system in DnD 4, but not too keen on most of the differences.

 

[Baron Von Evil Satan]

My group plays 4th. I like it. It's simple from both a player and a DM perspective (it's soooo easy to put encounters together). My only real gripe with it is that combat takes for fucking ever.

 

[VuvuZelaMan]

My D&D group does 3.5 edition right now, but the other day the dungeon master told me that we may switch to 4th edition.

I don't like this idea because all I know is 3rd edition and 3.5 and I've heard a few things about 4th that I didn't like the sound of. Plus I have about 5 books for 3.5 so it kind of sucks that if we go to 4th that I would need to get all new books.

So DnD playing Escapists, what edition of DnD do you like the most? And should I suggest to my DM to stick with 3.5 or move on to 4th edition?

For your specific problem, I'd recommend looking into the Essentials books should the change go through. There's only 2 and the class builds there operate more like 3.5 classes.

As far as which one is better, it's really hard to say. They both have a different feel to them, independent of play style.

OT: I've only played 3.5 (and d20 derivatives) and 4.0, but asking which is better doesn't really make sense. The real question is, which one allows your group to function better, and that varies based on group dynamics more than anything else.

 

[Macgyvercas]

3.5

Everything else kinda pales in comparison, imo.

 

[Naheal]

I used to prefer 3.5 due to familiarity, but, as I become more familiar with 4th with my current campaign, I'm finding that 4th is exceedingly adaptable.

 

[deadmandante]

I have played 3.5 and 4th. I had a lot of fun DMing and playing 3.5, up to and including placing random stuff for them to maybe find, but giving no clues as to if it would lead to anything. On guy got a vorpal sword and bow. The dice loved him that day. I have only played 4th a few times, but it was pretty good. Not as deep in as 3.5 but still good. I also loath Splug. Upon his death I took his face as a trophy.

 

[Serenegoose]

Personally, I think 4th offers the best combat, whereas 3.5 offers the 'deepest' setting. I'd go with 4, because I absolutely loathe the combat in everything before 4, and it's kind of a big part of DnD. I may be in the minority, though.

 

[GrimTuesday]

I play 4th and I can tell you that it really isn't that bad, however it does somewhat nerf some of the classes for out of combat skills, especially paladins.

 

[Gamblerjoe]

4.0 is crap. do everything in your power to convince your DM to stick with 3.5. 4.0 is designed for lazy DMs and incompetent players. the way powers work completely destroys the suspension of disbelief.

 

[Tasachan]

If your DM is getting bored with 3.5, but you guys still like it, why not check out Pathfinder? It's pretty similar, but they have improved a few things. The rulebooks are beautiful (and you can also check out the PDFs online) and some of the new classes they're adding are interesting. (alchemist, witch, etc)

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/

There is their link to the online rulebook.



4.0, I haven't played it yet but I do have the rulebooks. It looks really dumbed down. I don't really know if it plays any better, but I don't really think I'd try it any time soon.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

If your DM is getting bored with 3.5, but you guys still like it, why not check out Pathfinder?

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/

There is their link to the online rulebook.

Likewise. I've been playing the Pathfinder update to 3.5 since the Alpha playtest. It is basically 3.75 - an update of 3.5 that tries to incorporate the good elements from 4th without losing the 3.5 feel. And it succeeds wonderfully.

I highly recommend Pathfinder to any fans of 3.5 who aren't happy with (or don't want to buy a dozen new books just to play) 4th ed.

The online rulebooks have everything you need to play (although I happily bought the Core book, Beastary, and Advanced Players Guide because I like having physical books to flip through).

 

[Mr.Squishy]

Me and my group started out with 4th, and then we decided to try 3.5 . We never looked back, seeing as it's fun both from a DM's point of view and a player's point of view. Sure, it has it's flaws, but 4th lacks the sheer adaptibility and depth of 3.5, what with lacking all spells that are not evocations (alright, the 'rituals' were there to compensate, but still "meh")save for a few and every class feels the same. And combat takes fucking forever, and now there's "bloodied" and Healing surges to piss around with as well. I still like it a bit that wizards never run out of spells and thus is always somehow useful in 4th though, I'll give it that. Also, I've read the sourcebooks for AD&D, 2nd ed. and 3rd and I'm itching to try them, although they seem kinda inferior to 3.5.

 

[ArgumentGuy]

I haven't played any edition before 3rd, but from what I've heard, the early editions were really complex and the combat was chaotic and backwards. (thac0 springs readily to mind)

I liked 3rd edition, and when they switched to 3.5, it seemed to me that they just made it better. Plus, I didn't actually own any 3rd edition books, so I wasn't too put off by the change. Now however, I own a library's worth of 3.5 edition books, and just as I was really starting to get deeply into the game, WotC cut off 3.5 in order to release 4th edition. That really pissed me off I vowed not to play 4th edition for that reason alone. I already owned a hell of a lot of 3.5 books, I didn't want to buy the whole set all over again.

But wait, I can't condemn a game system for just that reason, so I figured I'd at least play the game once. After playing the game, I'm more assured that I don't want to play 4th edition. The game system is seriously dumbed down, all of the character classes have special magic powers, and it doesn't really have a true "Role-Playing" feel to it anymore. If I wanted to play D&D 4th Edition, I'd just turn on World of Warcraft.