Long before 4th edition hit the shelves I was running a very successful 3.5 D&D campaign. The longer the campaign went on, the more it became painfully obvious to me that the system seemed fundamentally flawed. The skill system seemed completely under utilized and over cumbersome to me. The races felt absolutely pointless unless you were using them for nothing more than story elements. The games power curve was stuck on humans. Then there were the classes. After the first couple levels, most were useless. The wizards ruled the game!
I began to experiment with ways to improve the system such as combining similar skills and eliminating useless ones. I made attempts at balancing the races while actually making them useful. Further attempts at balancing the classes! What I realized was that I was rewriting the whole damn system and it wasn’t worth it! Then along came Paizo’s Pathfinder! I feel like they hit the nail on the head with their races and classes but not quite with skills. In any case I feel that it makes hanging on to the old D20 system a little more tolerable than sticking with the 3.5 rules sets. I’d like to hear back from some of you on your experiences with it. A friendly debate if you will about the merits and flaws of 3.5 vs. Pathfinder or heck even vs. 4th edition if we must. I happen to feel that despite the bogginess of the combat system 4th edition as a whole is a far superior system. “Gulp” (I suppose I just stuck my neck out on that one!)
Comments
Time for the follower of Elistraee to make a comment...
Systems and Gaming:
While you could literally lose yourself in the number of these Spy vs Spy scenarios, this game is far superior to that one. Blue underwear is what the ladies prefer over white, yada yada. There is nothing truly that is better than the other, all elements in ANY game are left up to both the players and the DM. This need for a simple way to supercede the DM is where the whole "Is this a better game" phrase came up from. Players like to stick it to their DM's and a good DM will roll with the punches, learn from the encounter and move forward. The only thing that anyone need to remember though is that the DM is essentially god, or all the gods. When a rule makes no sense or has to be researched through book, by book, by book a DM has to make the call to simplify the rule on the fly or let it grind his game to a halt. So in asking is this a better game, you essentially take out the one thing that happens when players and DM's come together. Comraderie and understanding. When you play you're there to be with your friends and make some new memories. I never understood this thing about balance in classes, it reminds me of watching the World of Warcraft whiner boards. "This class kicked my butt, I wanna beat it, whine whine whine." But then you look up the dude on WoW Heroes and find out he's an Arena Season 9 winner and has weapons and equipment you'd sell your mothers fine china to get. When using a class you have to understand it's limitations and it's strengths, you say a wizard ruled 3.5? I say get in his spellcasting face and chew him up with Attacks of opportunity. You have to know what your class is capable of or even the mix of classes you chose, the only problem even I have seen with the system is the multiclassing aspect. You lose so much and the benefits hardly outweigh the lower powers. But then again I do recall some multiclasses that worked so well they were deadly. I'm reminded of a Paladin/Ghostwalker I once wrote up, the mix was volatile and dangerous on the battlefield. I think you have to take systems at face value, after all marvel was made back in the 70's and yet we still use it today because no other super hero game has the fluid simplicity of that system. Games are what you make of them, you can have super powered badgers running the dairy industry. If they were do you think you'd be drinking anything else but Badger milk?
Two years ago, after I tried 4th edition for several sessions, I posted a thread at Louisvillerpg.com called "Why I don't like 4E." It generated a robust debate. Here's a link: http://louisvillerpg.com/forum/index.php?topic=2155.0
Here is my opening argument that started it:
It's not the worst game in the world. It has some good things going for it, but on balance I have discovered that I just don't enjoy playing it.
This is in no particular order.
#1 There is not much variety in character types. The classes are much more pigeon-holed than they were in 3.0/5. For example, in 3.5 I ran a rogue who wielded a morningstar. They have proficiency in simple weapons, and it is a simple weapon. It does good damage that is both piercing and crushing. But the thing I liked most is that it defies the stereotypes. Rogues are supposed to have daggers or shortswords, so it was fun to break convention and carry a big spiked club. But in 4E, the rogue powers only work with light blades. So all rogues are stuck using the same weapons. That is just one example. Usually each class has two or three variants, and that is about it. I find that dull.
#2 Since everything is now expressed as powers, and every class has different powers, you can't just play off of your character sheet. Every class is now like a spellcaster where you have to look up each spell in the book before you cast it.
#3 A lot of the powers are redundant. In the old 1E, there was would be different versions of each spell for each class. There was a magic-user dispel magic, and a cleric dispel magic, and a druid dispel magic for example. The spells were listed seperately for each class, and half of them were redundant. They fixed that in 3E, but unfixed it in 4th Ed. Now each class has a separate list of powers but most of them are effectively the same as powers from other classes. Fighters can mark, whereas paladins can "divine challenge" which is basically a mark, etc.
#4 In order to fill out the list of powers, half of them are just tedious. "If you hit your enemy, another enemy adjacent can you can be marked by an ally of yours adjacent to it so that it suffers -1 on saves vs acid on even numbered rounds if you shift while it is bloodied..." or some shit like that. Lots of trouble for little payoff, and just a hassle.
#5 Lots of powers have clauses that kick in if someone does something before the end of your next round. With everyone in the battle casting that shit, you have to keep track of which triggers are in effect from everyone's previous round actions. If someone takes his eyes off of the board to get a coke from the kitchen when it is not his turn, it seems like he always says when he comes back "Wait, if that guy moved this round, my guy should have been able to do X because of my action last round."
#6 All of the paragon paths only provide some combat class features, two attack powers and a utility power each. They are all just more combat tricks. For example, there is a ranger paragon path called the "Pathfinder." Now that should provide some bonuses when navigating in the wilderness or something right? Wrong. It just provides some tricks in combat.
#7 The net effect of the changes seems to be that it is even more miniatures-battle focused than before. We have played Keep on the Shadowfell and the storyline just ends up being flavortext to introduce a series of miniatures battles. I feel like I am playing the D&D Minis game with pokemon-type cards (powers whatever) added in. I like combat plenty (see the arena for proof) but I want to roleplay too. I want to solve mysteries, play politics, ...and I want to have a reason why I should give a shit about moving figures around on the grid.
#8 it is almost impossible to die. At one point I got bored and decided to suicide my character just to see what would happen. I couldn't do it. With all the healing surges, second winds, action points, getting all your hit points back each rest without healing, etc. It is hard work to die in 4E. Once you realize that it saps a lot of the suspense. I finally got tired and gave up trying to die.
There are some things I like about the game. The shorter skill list is good. I like the way reflex save and touch AC were merged.
"At one point I got bored and decided to suicide my character just to see what would happen..."
I see this is now a trend. :) At least in ACKS, it ain't hard to suicide.
http://louisvillednd.com <--------check us out everyone. We aren't using 3.5 or 4E, so it's worth playing.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!