PDA

View Full Version : Doesn't Anyone Play 3e Anymore?



Aramil
12-17-2009, 07:46 PM
I've been hanging out in chat a lot and it seems like no one plays 3e.

cplmac
12-17-2009, 08:00 PM
Aramil, actually Aeval & Harley were running a 3.0 game in the chat, but when they came back from vacation, we only had 2 people come back when they were here to run the game next. If we can find enough players, they may be willing to try, but we usually get inquiries and that is about as far as it goes.

nijineko
12-22-2009, 03:01 PM
you mean 3.0 as vs. 3.5? or did you mean 3.x in general?

Farcaster
12-22-2009, 03:43 PM
Not everyone converted over to 4th edition. I don't know the exact statistics, but I think there is still a strong third edition following as evidenced by companies like Paizo who are making a successful go at carrying on the third edition line. Personally, I have vacillated on which edition I prefer ever since the first hints of what the new edition would hold were first announced and up to today. What I have decided is that 4th edition excels for a certain type of feel and 3rd edition another. So, the type of campaign that I am running would have an impact on which one I choose to use.

tesral
12-25-2009, 02:33 AM
Ah, yo, over here. No Forry played.

cplmac
12-26-2009, 07:45 PM
Actually, we have been using 2E in our tabletop group since September of 2008, when we started the "Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth" campaign. Now, in the future, if someone wants to run it, we may use 3.0 for a campaign.

Mindbomb
12-26-2009, 07:54 PM
Pathfinder here and loving it...

outrider
12-27-2009, 12:16 AM
I run 3.5 with my tabletop game. I had a shortlived 3.5 online.

Arch Lich Thoth-Amon
12-27-2009, 01:35 AM
I keep it 2E and earlier. There are always exceptions, of course.

templeorder
12-27-2009, 10:06 AM
3E soured me, Pathfinder is strong in my book though, and i would choose it over 4e. 4e is definitely geared around MMO experience and i agree that it would really depend on the type of campaign you want to run. I prefer my more gritty reality based games where the plot and play is challenging and not so much endless powers, plusses, and faster gratification that 4e really facilitates. On the other hand, 4e would make a much better system for shorter games as mine tend to take months to really develop characters where 4e you can play for a weekend and get up and running easy and have a lot of fun.

Arch Lich Thoth-Amon
12-27-2009, 10:41 AM
4E is great at conventions.

Skunkape
12-28-2009, 09:10 AM
Still playing/running 3.5 with no plans to go to 4.

Webhead
12-28-2009, 09:50 PM
3E/4E/Pathfinder have sent me elsewhere, looking for a different and more palatable gaming experience. It was less of an instantaneous epiphany and more of a laborious, creeping exploration and realization of what I valued, enjoyed and admired in a game system and play-style.

d-_-b
12-29-2009, 11:39 AM
I haven't even read 4E but I'm planning on sticking with 3.5E for a while yet as I am quite happy with the mechanics of the game. One thing I have been inspired to do is to look into doing away with objective good and evil by eliminating it from alignment altogether. This will have a profound effect on spell lists and abilities, so it is quite a project. Happily I'm not the first one to have these thoughts:)

cigamnogard
12-30-2009, 04:53 PM
:thumb:
I haven't even read 4E but I'm planning on sticking with 3.5E for a while yet as I am quite happy with the mechanics of the game. One thing I have been inspired to do is to look into doing away with objective good and evil by eliminating it from alignment altogether. This will have a profound effect on spell lists and abilities, so it is quite a project. Happily I'm not the first one to have these thoughts:)

WhiteTiger
12-31-2009, 09:57 AM
Pathfinder here and loving it...


I'm with Mindbomb. I've gone to Pathfinder as well and I'm not looking at getting anything else. I like it a lot. My group and I didn't want to invest too much into a new system and we've been hoping for continued 3.X support so that we could use our old books and We found pretty much what we are looking for from Paizo. It's not perfect but what system is. :cool:

cigamnogard
12-31-2009, 10:02 AM
I'm with Mindbomb. I've gone to Pathfinder as well and I'm not looking at getting anything else. I like it a lot. My group and I didn't to invest too much into a new system and we've been hoping for continued 3.X support so that we could use our old books and We found pretty much what we are looking for from Paizo. It's not perfect but what system is. :cool:
Which XP advancement chart do you use?

WhiteTiger
12-31-2009, 10:08 AM
Which XP advancement chart do you use?

At the moment, I am testing Fast. If it ends up being faster than what I wanted, I may end up dropping it back to medium. Time will tell.

cigamnogard
12-31-2009, 10:46 AM
At the moment, I am testing Fast. If it ends up being faster than what I wanted, I may end up dropping it back to medium. Time will tell.
We used regular and it killed our Pathfinder game.

Swordnboard
12-31-2009, 12:09 PM
With WhiteTiger, Mindbomb, and others: Pathfinder. 4E was just too different for me.

Also running with Fast XP... I don't think I'd ever play with slow (and medium is probably out too).

cigamnogard
12-31-2009, 12:17 PM
With WhiteTiger, Mindbomb, and others: Pathfinder. 4E was just too different for me.

Also running with Fast XP... I don't think I'd ever play with slow (and medium is probably out too).
Trust me on that one - regular way too slow. We also had an issue with how flight was done but that was minor in comparison with the XP stagnation.

Webhead
12-31-2009, 07:05 PM
Also running with Fast XP... I don't think I'd ever play with slow (and medium is probably out too).

Maybe it just speaks about my preferences as a gamer in general, but I've always preferred a slower and more gradual sort of advancement to characters. Without going into detail on why I dislike level-based advancement systems in general, I was often put off by most D&D campaigns I played in when it seemed as if we gained a level about every second session. It leaves very little breathing room and, consequently, your character doesn't so much feel as if they are "growing and learning" but rather as if they intermittently "power up", reminiscent of Altered Beast.

YouTube- Mega64 - Altered Beast

The idea that a D&D character can go from 1st level snotling to 20th level god-child in the space of less than 6 months of in-game time just staggers me.

Inquisitor Tremayne
12-31-2009, 07:31 PM
Still playing 3.5 but with all the Star Wars Saga I am playing it is really making me not want to play 3.5.

I GM'd a short lived 4e game and did not like it at all.

cigamnogard
12-31-2009, 11:04 PM
youtube- mega64 - altered beast (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frhde3tiyce)



lol!

templeorder
01-01-2010, 12:33 PM
YouTube- Mega64 - Altered Beast (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRHdE3tiycE)

The idea that a D&D character can go from 1st level snotling to 20th level god-child in the space of less than 6 months of in-game time just staggers me.

Ok, now that was funny.
I agree - i prefer skill based games, not levels and a slower advancement rate not based on a power up model. Character points is what i use, you choose where to improve yourself after each session limited by your aptitudes. BUT, for those on-off sessions, i'd say 4e is perfect. Cons, as mentioned before, is an excellent place for the newer, more instant gratification based editions of DnD. I still find the flavor of 3.5 preferable to 4 though and will probably never, ever play it - even at cons... because to tell you the truth i would not expect much development from one-offs anyway - its all about the goal and play at that point.

WhiteTiger
01-01-2010, 12:46 PM
The idea that a D&D character can go from 1st level snotling to 20th level god-child in the space of less than 6 months of in-game time just staggers me.

I definitely agree with you but also the group that I play in had to come up with some sort of agreeable consensus in regarding the amount of game-time spent & real-time spent for character leveling.

at the moment, My group is looking at about 2 - 3 years in game-time and thankfully not real-time to gain 15 levels which is still ridiculously high. I would say that 1 or 2 levels per year seems more reasonable but then we tend to end up with a lot of downtime in which I have to speed them through it. It's definitely a weird trade off between "fun" and "reasonable".

Dytrrnikl
01-01-2010, 01:42 PM
I play 4E simply for mindless entertainment - doesn't require as much to make a character and sit and play.

I play my own bastardized version of DnD, based on a Blend of Saga Edition Star Wars - everything is an attack roll, classes have a smattering of talents that are class specific (admittedly most stolen directly from Saga) and Pathfinder/3E for feats and other snippets.

templeorder
01-02-2010, 05:21 AM
Not having done enough 3 vs 4 play, can anyone out there give a character creation time frame to compare the 2? It seemed like in 4e it actually took longer - but thats probably my lack of familiarity. Seems like they would be quite similar, but i got so used to all the base and prestige classes that i could blow through character creation in only a couple minutes... with a point pool attribute generation...

tesral
01-02-2010, 10:19 AM
I am growing disenchanted with the whole D&D from the book "no" attitude.

I've already decided that if anything happens to my current character I'm out of the game. I'm tired of the endless roadblocks to what ever one tries to do...unless you have a skill that is cross class or a feat that is not available.

The more I look at the system the more is see it forcing you down certain paths in a character building direction. It places unreasonable restrictions on character creation.

Webhead
01-02-2010, 11:04 AM
I am growing disenchanted with the whole D&D from the book "no" attitude.

I've already decided that if anything happens to my current character I'm out of the game. I'm tired of the endless roadblocks to what ever one tries to do...unless you have a skill that is cross class or a feat that is not available.

The more I look at the system the more is see it forcing you down certain paths in a character building direction. It places unreasonable restrictions on character creation.

Agreed. That's one of the reasons I tend to prefer more universal point-based character creation systems where all skills (except perhaps very advanced skills like surgery or engineering) cost the same amount for every character and are available to all who wish to purchase them.

tesral
01-02-2010, 11:54 AM
Agreed. That's one of the reasons I tend to prefer more universal point-based character creation systems where all skills (except perhaps very advanced skills like surgery or engineering) cost the same amount for every character and are available to all who wish to purchase them.


I do this in my own game. The idea of cross class skills does not exist. It's another counter intuitive idea. I chuck those in the bin as quickly as possible.

Dusty
01-02-2010, 07:51 PM
I always run my games in 3.5. Ive had no intention to stitch at all.

templeorder
01-03-2010, 09:26 AM
I remember my last 3,5 game i tried to create basically a spartan warrior and could not do it. Everything was so cookie-cutter that it was almost impossible to envision a character outside what was offered...

Ability buy-up approaches i find much more suited. The idea of 'muti-classing' then becomes possible but realistically difficult as you spread your abilities so then. It really reflects the whole idea of specialization and 'class' in a way that much more realistic - not forced by mechanics but rather reality.

Dytrrnikl
01-03-2010, 09:49 AM
...The more I look at the system the more is see it forcing you down certain paths in a character building direction. It places unreasonable restrictions on character creation.

I've only recently begun playing 4E steadily in the last 6 to 8 weeks. It does return to more of a 2E feel, in that fighters are fighters, clerics are clerics, and so forth. However, I still see 2E as being the best version of DnD...more of a story based, cinematic feel to combat - I loved the 1 minute combat rounds...where all incarnations of 3E have hyper tactical combat - I loathe to near hatred the 6 second combat round, always will...and 4E goes for the instant gratification, wuxia type combat right from the start - you don't need to 'survive' fledgling levels to get some kudos. But that's me.


Not having done enough 3 vs 4 play, can anyone out there give a character creation time frame to compare the 2? It seemed like in 4e it actually took longer - but thats probably my lack of familiarity. Seems like they would be quite similar, but i got so used to all the base and prestige classes that i could blow through character creation in only a couple minutes... with a point pool attribute generation...

Initially, I had some issues with 4E generation, mainly due to complete lack of familiarity. Now, as I always do, with any system that is new to me, I sit down and create characters 20 or so, give or take a few. Ultimately, I found 4E character creation to be less intensive than 3E, but more so than 2E. 3E still has mechanical differences between the classes, 4E the only difference, as I've said above and in other places about 4E, is thematic, they are identical except for minor differences.

templeorder
01-04-2010, 09:55 AM
In my experience its not the length of the combat round thats makes for good role playing per se. I prefer more realistic combat systems where its the skill in attack and defense that makes a difference - not nebulous levels and "hit points". I use a 6 second combat round in my system and action measures to allow characters to do whatever the total action measures allow. Its the best stylistic fighting i've experienced yet - and its very tactical. Brawn counts but in a protracted fight - brains count more. I still see character drop in one hit - thats the nature of things, but i also see very memorable things almost every combat - team tactics, real maneuvers, various advantages used to their maximum.

My game group adapted 2E to a similar approach (though very different mechanics) that was still my favorite combat version of DnD platforms. previous versions i think were more adaptable because they did not over-mechanize every combat scenario... 3E was still workable and i think game fledgling GM's more to work with, but took away from experienced ones by imposing more mechanics where before it was GM flavor. 4E's gone overboard on that (in my opinion).

cigamnogard
01-07-2010, 02:30 PM
I remember my last 3,5 game i tried to create basically a spartan warrior and could not do it. Everything was so cookie-cutter that it was almost impossible to envision a character outside what was offered...


See fighter class and add Complete Warrior special feats.

Lucifer_Draconus
01-07-2010, 03:34 PM
Stopped playing 3.x a while back. If I did play , I'd play 3.5 or Pathfinder minus the evil miniature/tactical combat & movement rules. But I prefer Rolemaster 2/Classic & Express to other fantasy games now.

Niall
01-07-2010, 04:31 PM
I use a heavily houseruled 3. system for some of my games, but it is so altered it is not really 3.0 anymore. I have found something to appreciate in most games I have played, but I like realism without slowing the game to a crawl. I am just reading up on 4e, and have mixed opinions at this point.

Headless
01-07-2010, 05:41 PM
I was a player in a D&D 3.5 campaign for months, but our group took a break for the past few weeks. Next week, I'll be taking the DM reins again for a brand, spankin' new D&D 3.5 campaign, with a light sprinkling of D&D 3.0 and Pathfinder, and I'm lookin' forward to it. :)

Hallstadt
01-07-2010, 06:56 PM
Still playing 3.5 here, too, and no plans to convert to 4.0, either.

Dark
01-13-2010, 06:10 AM
I run 3.5 with my tabletop game on Saturday evening if you lived closer you be welcome to play. I ran a short lived 3.5 on line but due to my workload during the week I had to stop it for now.

mrken
01-13-2010, 11:53 AM
When WotC announced 3.0 was too old to continue supporting I figured it was time for me to find a better game.

cigamnogard
01-13-2010, 02:25 PM
And that is?

tesral
01-13-2010, 04:40 PM
I guess all the words fell of the pages.

d-_-b
01-13-2010, 04:53 PM
When WotC announced 3.0 was too old to continue supporting I figured it was time for me to find a better game.

What? That's a poor reason to quit.

I love that there's a huge number of 3.5 books and there's very few I'd want to be without, but how many do you really need to run a satisfactory game? In general I stick to the PHB's, the DMG's, the MM's and the Complete"*" books. I have these and quite a few others so screw that WotC don't support them because I LOVE 3.5!

BTW I believe i read somewhere that Paizo has taken over the support for these "old" books.

cigamnogard
01-14-2010, 11:10 AM
I guess all the words fell of the pages.
Hate when that happens.

Regicide
01-29-2010, 08:49 AM
Most of my experience is with 3.5. I've played 2ed, and I don't see what all the fuss is about. I do like the older editions' premise that powerful magic items do not necessarily have a price in mere gold. This paradigm makes the video-game inspired vulgar demystification of magic equipment (the ubiquitious ye olde magic shoppe) no longer have a basis in game rules. This is something that I have adopted in my own 3.5 games.

I've looked through 4th ed and I frankly have no interest in the type of game-play that it offers. Even the art style and general graphic layout of the books turns me off.

Pathfinder certainly offers some interesting tweaks. Perhaps I'll give it a closer look and incorporate what I like into my game. The change to how "class skills" work is defiantly a keeper.

Hamenopi
02-02-2010, 11:44 AM
I miss ThAC0 every so often but I'm a converted Pathfinder. GO 3.75!

WhiteTiger
02-02-2010, 12:23 PM
I miss ThAC0 every so often but I'm a converted Pathfinder. GO 3.75!

I don't miss THAC0. I went from heavily house-ruled 3.5 to a slightly house-ruled Pathfinder. It's working out pretty well. For the first time, My group successfully did a full-blown Tri-level dungeon crawl in less than 4 hours.

cigamnogard
02-02-2010, 05:11 PM
Four hours eh?
Impressive.

cpljarhead
02-03-2010, 03:56 PM
i play and dm 3.5 ed and while i tried 4e i do not like it nor plan to switch to it. i have the pathfinder books and they seem like a better system than 4e by far. i could and will play pathfinder and continue to play 3.5 ed but that as far as i go.

cigamnogard
02-03-2010, 05:09 PM
5.0 I'll bet will be awesome!

tesral
02-03-2010, 07:27 PM
For what value of awesome?

cigamnogard
02-03-2010, 07:43 PM
The DM will control a zap gun that will shoot unruly players for instance ;)

Webhead
02-03-2010, 11:42 PM
Tell me more about this zap gun...

Tim Proctor
02-04-2010, 12:43 AM
I love 3.5e compared to the others, second definitley is 2.0. It's so large and customizable that it makes it great. Then agian I prefer RIFTS and GURPS for that same reason too.

The more options the better, I hate how 4.0 is so much like WoW.

cigamnogard
02-04-2010, 02:16 PM
Tell me more about this zap gun...
Each player will be "plugged" into a VR so there will be no need for figurines or maps.
Each player will be connected by the Mastercontroller who will be in command of the game grid. In which players - let's call them users will ...
Anyone else going to go see the new Tron?

Frobozz
02-04-2010, 03:44 PM
I admit, I love 2E, but I got used to 3E pretty fast. I never bought the books to 3.5 since I saw it as a gimmick to grab more money. Simple revisions to a game system should be free in my opinion. I figured enough of my friends would that I wouldn't need it and they did.

I hate the tactical grid-based combat that they tried to push in 3E, but thankfully, I could easily ignore it. Complex fights were done on whiteboard. No lines, no grids; just rough ideas where everyone and every obstacle was. Combat is fast, fluid and efficient and best of all, you don't get "grid exploiters" farting with the tactical mechanics to gain some unrealistic edge.

This last week, I took a second, hard look at 4E and I still don't like it. It's funny that someone mentioned it was like an MMO, because that's the exact same feel I got as well. Combine this with the fact that most of the actions have grid-moves cooked into them and that combat is neigh impossible without a tactical grid, and I'm through with Wizards mucking with my favorite fantasy RPG. At this point, the only way someone could convince me otherwise is through a gaming session and they'd have to DM it well. :)

So, I bought into Pathfinder as my new crack. I overall find it a good step up from 3.5 and serves all my needs pretty well.

tesral
02-04-2010, 04:05 PM
Gridiitis is an evil disease. When they went to the fire cube, that was just too much.

Cleric to Party: "My friends, do you not wonder how the gods have aligned the universe verily into 5 foot squares? Indeed tis the very nature of the universe that all within snap to the grid."

I do this with my Eldrich Disciple to get the DMs goat.

WhiteTiger
02-04-2010, 04:15 PM
Each player will be "plugged" into a VR so there will be no need for figurines or maps.
Each player will be connected by the Mastercontroller who will be in command of the game grid. In which players - let's call them users will ...
Anyone else going to go see the new Tron?


I'll be first in line... :biggrin: :laser:

Regicide
02-04-2010, 08:56 PM
I do this with my Eldrich Disciple to get the DMs goat.When I want to get the DM's goat, I just cast "Charm Animal" on it.

tesral
02-05-2010, 05:05 AM
I have Animal Empathy and Speak with Animal.

Frobozz
02-05-2010, 07:37 AM
Having come from 0th ed, we didn't have any of that. I bash the goat's brains in with my warhammer, clean it and toss it on a spit over the campfire and baste it with some wild curry and chives.

Party's eating good tonight! :D

cplmac
02-05-2010, 06:41 PM
Having come from 0th ed, we didn't have any of that. I bash the goat's brains in with my warhammer, clean it and toss it on a spit over the campfire and baste it with some wild curry and chives.

Party's eating good tonight! :D

Is that how Og likes his goat prepared?

Although even in 2E you had the proficencies: Animal Handling and Animal Training. As well as the priest spells: Animal Friendship, Invisibility to Animals, Charm Mammal (Person), Hold Animal, and Anti Animal Shell.

In 3.0/3.5, I have only played as a fighter briefly, so I am not to up on what all may be available there, other than bashing mentioned by Frobozz.

tesral
02-05-2010, 11:06 PM
Having come from 0th ed, we didn't have any of that. I bash the goat's brains in with my warhammer, clean it and toss it on a spit over the campfire and baste it with some wild curry and chives.

Party's eating good tonight! :D

Goat's brains...Never met many goats I take it?

rabkala
02-10-2010, 04:49 PM
I still use 3.5 edition for my table top games. I am liking some of the pathfinder things and import them into my game.

Some of us are just careful to talk of it, so as not to attract the attention of the game police (a.k.a. WoTc nazi's)...

cigamnogard
02-10-2010, 07:03 PM
There are game police? Darn it!

tesral
02-10-2010, 11:02 PM
There are game police? Darn it!

Yes, you must drink the kool-aide.

fmitchell
02-11-2010, 12:31 AM
There are game police? Darn it!


Yes, you must drink the kool-aide.

"But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Fourth Edition."
-- From 2008, sequel to 1984 commissioned by the new owners of the Orwell estate.

Regicide
02-11-2010, 05:12 AM
Why not? The CIA did pretty much the same thing when they got hold of the film rights to Orwell's novels (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/031800-02.htm).