Amanda's got a blog. If blogs could talk, it'd ask you to read it. It might even say "please."
3e was a big change. They had 3.5 that fixed a lot of the bugs 3e had. The 4e changed quite a lot too, but was more similar to 3e that 3e was to 2e. And 4e's my favourite. Easier to learn that 3.5, and much better balanced. And more fun, in fact.
D&D along with most role playing games has been condemned (several times over the years) as being a route to insanity and godlessness, ultimately leading to suicide, murder, rape, and devil worship
can i worship Stan?
Quote from: Alyss on January 24, 2009, 03:16:37 AM3e was a big change. They had 3.5 that fixed a lot of the bugs 3e had. The 4e changed quite a lot too, but was more similar to 3e that 3e was to 2e. And 4e's my favourite. Easier to learn that 3.5, and much better balanced. And more fun, in fact.4e is incredibly lame because it prevents you from moulding your character in the way you want. It has reduced the number of alignments from 9 to 6, it has cut back on skills and feats, pretty much done away with spells (making the wizard class insufferable), and all but done away with the concept of epic levels but making characters fade into agnosia upon reaching lvl. 30.3.5e is good as long as you're committed; D&D was intended to be a game that people actually put a little time and effort into, not something you just start playing on a rainy day when you're bored.
Quote from: The King of Carrot Flowers on January 24, 2009, 03:39:35 PMQuote from: Alyss on January 24, 2009, 03:16:37 AM3e was a big change. They had 3.5 that fixed a lot of the bugs 3e had. The 4e changed quite a lot too, but was more similar to 3e that 3e was to 2e. And 4e's my favourite. Easier to learn that 3.5, and much better balanced. And more fun, in fact.4e is incredibly lame because it prevents you from moulding your character in the way you want. It has reduced the number of alignments from 9 to 6, it has cut back on skills and feats, pretty much done away with spells (making the wizard class insufferable), and all but done away with the concept of epic levels but making characters fade into agnosia upon reaching lvl. 30.3.5e is good as long as you're committed; D&D was intended to be a game that people actually put a little time and effort into, not something you just start playing on a rainy day when you're bored.Epic level in 3.5 sucked. Wizards were ludicrously broken in 3.5, and now they're balanced along with the other classes. And I prefer the 5 alignments 4e has. The 9 alignments didn't make any sense.
Quote from: Alyss on January 24, 2009, 03:41:36 PMQuote from: The King of Carrot Flowers on January 24, 2009, 03:39:35 PMQuote from: Alyss on January 24, 2009, 03:16:37 AM3e was a big change. They had 3.5 that fixed a lot of the bugs 3e had. The 4e changed quite a lot too, but was more similar to 3e that 3e was to 2e. And 4e's my favourite. Easier to learn that 3.5, and much better balanced. And more fun, in fact.4e is incredibly lame because it prevents you from moulding your character in the way you want. It has reduced the number of alignments from 9 to 6, it has cut back on skills and feats, pretty much done away with spells (making the wizard class insufferable), and all but done away with the concept of epic levels but making characters fade into agnosia upon reaching lvl. 30.3.5e is good as long as you're committed; D&D was intended to be a game that people actually put a little time and effort into, not something you just start playing on a rainy day when you're bored.Epic level in 3.5 sucked. Wizards were ludicrously broken in 3.5, and now they're balanced along with the other classes. And I prefer the 5 alignments 4e has. The 9 alignments didn't make any sense.They made sense to anyone with half a brain (no offense, I just get really stodgy about this crap). Come on, give me one alignment that's confusing.
