It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)What is the best D&D or AD&D edition?(46 posts)(46 posts)
(46 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
This is my favourite topic
Posted February 13, 2013
avatar
KoolZoid: 4th Edition D&D - Oh Hasbro, I can still feel your steel-capped boots on my boy-parts. And not in a good way. Don't ever go here.
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: I find 4th ed perfectly playable, albeit not really D&D.
You _want_ to see flying fists, don't you? ;)

(Edit: Personally I simply don't care. For me, the thread went out of the window when the first post mentioned "D&D" and "consistent" in the same sentence. But that might be only me. ;) )
Post edited February 13, 2013 by Psyringe
Posted February 13, 2013
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: I find 4th ed perfectly playable, albeit not really D&D.
avatar
KoolZoid: 4th Edition was a very different game from the flexible and multi-faceted format that was 3.5ed. It practically regressed to Basic D&D in terms of the emphasis it placed on combat over any other kind of playstyle - in fact, with it's introduction of fixed 'roles', the removal of non-combat spells and abilities, and the reduction of all class abilities to near-identical spell-like abilities, it read like the pen'n'paper version of an MMORPG.

And, really, no-one wants to get me started on players being able to decide what treasure they get from an encounter and actually being able to tick off the number of encounters they have until they get it....

It might have made a very nice board game. It was not, however, the next evolution of AD&D that we'd been promised.

But hey, I like Rolemaster, so that probably tells you everything you need to know about my own gaming habits :)
I've run games in 2nd, 3rd, 3.5 and 4th ed. I'll admit that I haven't seen much of a difference in what players can do, I just sometimes have to be a little more flexible in what I tell them to roll for.

In RPGs, rules can be a straightjacket, or they can be a skeleton; I opt for more of the latter than the former.
Posted February 13, 2013
I'd recommend to avoid D&D 4 if you want a roleplaying game. 4 is OK IMO if you just want some table top strategy game with miniatures ... but then you might better play Warhammer.

As D&D roleplaying systems go, I would recommend 3.5. It is playable and has been cleaned from some quirks and contradictions of the past systems.
Posted February 13, 2013
avatar
KoolZoid: 4th Edition was a very different game from the flexible and multi-faceted format that was 3.5ed.
I laugh at anyone who thinks any edition of D&D is flexible! <Looks over at his collection of GURPS books while working on a PhD in mathematics so he can make a vehicle in said system>
Posted February 13, 2013
avatar
KoolZoid: 4th Edition was a very different game from the flexible and multi-faceted format that was 3.5ed.
avatar
Sielle: I laugh at anyone who thinks any edition of D&D is flexible! <Looks over at his collection of GURPS books while working on a PhD in mathematics so he can make a vehicle in said system>
Well, it's flexible as far as editions of D&D goes, and that's what the OP wanted :)

I've nothing agains GURPS myself, although I favour the HERO system for letting you do what you like (plus I love my d6s) :P
Posted February 13, 2013
avatar
grinninglich: Hmm Pathfinder seems nice. I will also get Planescape and Vampire Masquarade books.
Vampire (and other RPG systems from White Wolf) are great is you want to focus on the story (instead of the rules).
Posted February 13, 2013
avatar
KoolZoid: 4th Edition was a very different game from the flexible and multi-faceted format that was 3.5ed. It practically regressed to Basic D&D in terms of the emphasis it placed on combat over any other kind of playstyle - in fact, with it's introduction of fixed 'roles', the removal of non-combat spells and abilities, and the reduction of all class abilities to near-identical spell-like abilities, it read like the pen'n'paper version of an MMORPG.

And, really, no-one wants to get me started on players being able to decide what treasure they get from an encounter and actually being able to tick off the number of encounters they have until they get it....

It might have made a very nice board game. It was not, however, the next evolution of AD&D that we'd been promised.

But hey, I like Rolemaster, so that probably tells you everything you need to know about my own gaming habits :)
avatar
TheEnigmaticT: I've run games in 2nd, 3rd, 3.5 and 4th ed. I'll admit that I haven't seen much of a difference in what players can do, I just sometimes have to be a little more flexible in what I tell them to roll for.

In RPGs, rules can be a straightjacket, or they can be a skeleton; I opt for more of the latter than the former.
Truly, I applaud your ability to make a good game from the 4th Ed ruleset. For myself, it took away too many things and left it for me to make stuff up to compensate for it. Mind you, I luuuuurve rules :D Ask anyone who play with me....
Posted February 13, 2013
I have a sweet spot for AD&D 2nd edition as that's the one I started with. That said, the best role-playing sessions I've had were freestyle ones, without any set rules or use of dice.
Posted February 13, 2013
I own a lot of 4th ed. stuff but my personal preference to DnD is 3.5 or Pathfinder. If you want to emphasize more on roleplay and story, the World of Darkness (Core, Vampire, Mage etc) are really good. Also, if you like horror like WoD, go and get the Call of Cthulhu game by Chaosium!
Posted February 13, 2013
3.5
Posted February 13, 2013
avatar
pseudonarne: 3.5
That was my favorite post so far. +1 for you! :D
Posted February 13, 2013
/puts on flameproof suit


Read this:

http://www.lulu.com/shop/matthew-finch/quick-primer-for-old-school-gaming/ebook/product-3159558.html

Shows why 3rd/3.5/PF is really limiting.

And 4th...

Well, as someone said, 4th is a great board game but a terrible role playing game.

If I had my choice id play 1st or 2nd hands down.
Posted February 13, 2013
I recommend either 3.5/pathfinder or 4th, it's really our choice, 4th is really good for new players and most the hate is because it's radically different than other DnD games. 3.5 is also a good system, it has the classic DnD flavor but there's more depth than 2nd Ed.

Avoid 2nd edition AD&D, it's filled with bad complexity that can bod down the game, non spell casters have very little depth in their choices and there's stupid limitations to Races and Classes that are only there to enforce cliches. Oh! and the different experience tables make it a chore to balance as a GM. It's an overrated mess.

If you want a game that supports Roleplaying, best Avoid DnD. All D&D games are for combat and little else, roleplaying can happen but the rules are geared towards tactical combat and RPing is all on the GM no matter if it's 2nd, 3.5 or 4th.
Posted February 13, 2013
I've been playing Pathfinder (based on 3.5) with some friends and it's a lot of fun. I took a look at the 4e rules and it seemed really 'different', didn't really strike me as something that I wanted to try.

I also have the rulebook for Dungeon World, but we haven't tried it yet. The rules seem much simpler, though.
Posted February 13, 2013
avatar
grinninglich: Now i am gonna buy books of some edition which version should i buy? Which is the most consistent and enjoyable?
Will most definitely get shot down for this one but 1st Edition AD&D - can't beat the old Cavalier or Barbarian from Unearthed Arcana!!!!
Pages:
1
2
3
4
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)What is the best D&D or AD&D edition?(46 posts)(46 posts)
(46 posts)