| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| aragorn II |
Posted - 26 Nov 2004 : 00:49:32
What version of D&D do you play? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| The Sage |
Posted - 17 Dec 2010 : 23:32:35
I started with 1e, but 2e was the "golden standard" for me. It's were I firstly truly fell in love with the game. |
| idilippy |
Posted - 17 Dec 2010 : 19:31:19
Pathfinder mainly for me, in my opinion they've improved on 3.5e's problems(Grappling, power creep, PrC's required for classes) while keeping the majority of what made 3.5e fun(mainly customization"). I also play 2e occasionally, since it is the very first rule system I ever read and still very fun to play, especially when I don't want to worry about a combat map or AoO's and would rather run a more freeform combat. 3.x and above comes with the expectation for many players that you will use a combat map so they can move their pieces around, while 2e doesn't have this expectation. 4e seems to be a fine game but I don't use it or really have any desire to, I have enough material bought between 3.5e, 2e, Pathfinder, and the Dresden RPG system that I'm not able to afford to add another system's worth of material on top of that. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 17 Dec 2010 : 18:56:25
I've played A LOT of 3/3.5/Pathfinder and 4E and I tend to feel that each edition has it's merits and faults
For me, I love switching back between 3.5/Pathfinder and 4E. 3.5/Pathfinder has SUCH versatility that is so suprising from an RPG and is ones of it's greatest qualities (and sometimes a big problem). You can pretty much accomplish any character concept/theme you desire with enough material and info to play for 100 years.
Though 4E has done much to alleviate the rigors of DMing, as they made Plug-and-Play a staple point in that edition. I also like how everything is greatly geared towards combat and I (as the DM) can make up ANY info I want to compliment those statistics. In additon, character creation is simply superb when it comes to party mechanics. A character (no matter the role) does that role well and classes are geared now towards flavor instead of power.
I think I'd have to vote 4E for now. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 17 Dec 2010 : 18:55:05
I'd like to say Chainmail but I'm not that old, and don't have a copy, and apparently it sucked anyhow.
Generally 3.x for me, although the titan's share of the "source material" I use is from 2E in all it's furiously frenzied messy gloriousness.
I must confess that (once the disturbing changes in setting are entirely ignored) I find the 4E game mechanics are fairly good. I especially like the new monster/encounter setup, as significantly improved as 3E's monster templates were, though the rest of the rules/classes/etc are a bit hit or miss and more "simplified" than my group likes. Nice artwork, better writing, fewer books (for now), good for quick-n-dirty streamlined throwdown play - though I still won't use it for "serious" campaigns. |
| Arioch |
Posted - 17 Dec 2010 : 18:53:49
3.5 is the BEST D&D edition up to date :-)
That said: actually I'm enjoying a lot Fantasy Craft (d20) as the mechanic system behind post-Plague Realms.
(A lot better, for me than Pathfinder) |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 17 Dec 2010 : 18:32:29
I grew up in 2E, but I think 3.5 or PFRPG is the best ruleset yet. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 17 Dec 2010 : 17:47:57
I started with late 2nd ed, and loved it from the start. However, once the revised rules for 3rd ed came out and I really took a look at them, I loved them even more. I still use some of the old rules from 2nd, but I'm now mostly 3.5 -oriented. (sounds like a $exual preference, lol!) I tried 4th ed ONCE. Never again. Too choppy and hack-n-slash geared for my taste, with little proper meshing of skills and abilities for classes. |
| Synthalus |
Posted - 17 Dec 2010 : 16:15:30
Im one of those die hards you speak of jorkens! I only play AD&D 1978 Edition. The shear amount of control and knowledge it puts out really allows for almost anything to happen as long as you can conceive it and work it out through the ghame mechanics that are provided. Which are far more extensive then those of the later editions save for 2nd ED.i started playing this edition and i will always choose it over the other editions. I have attempted to play 3E but found it lacking the classic touch and feel that i was used to. |
| GRYPHON |
Posted - 11 Nov 2007 : 15:00:39
I have been playing since 1E, but we play 2E FR (House Rules) with a tiny drop of 3E. Most of us detest the new editions. . .
However, I do pick up any information on the Realm, irregardless of what version it is. . . |
| Austran |
Posted - 11 Nov 2007 : 10:29:06
Currently 3.5rd Edition with some rules of Unearthed Arcana and others House Rules. Oh yes, and a thing or another from the good and old AD&D 2nd Edition. |
| IronHammer |
Posted - 10 Oct 2007 : 22:06:55
me and a couple of my old buddies actually still play basic every now and again for old times sake but mainly we'er into 3 and 3.5 now.. |
| Apex |
Posted - 09 Oct 2007 : 17:33:29
We currently play (I DM) a second edition Realms campaign (although we ignore the ToT). BUt we are really considering restarting and going back to the roots with 1st ed in the next campaign (and keeping it to the 1st ed Realms supplements/Grey Box). |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 30 Sep 2007 : 16:01:34
Well, it is over 50% 3rd edition, nearly 75% of 3ed and 3,5 put together. Some of old are diehards, but not many. The talk about 3ed. at the moment would probably have more to do with the upcoming edition change though. |
| Aravine |
Posted - 30 Sep 2007 : 12:45:24
Wow. The result of this poll suprises me. the way everyone keeps talking about 3E, I would have thought it would have come out much differently
|
| Grimbolt Hammerhand |
Posted - 14 Jan 2007 : 11:06:04
Or maybe we are just stupid  |
| boddynock |
Posted - 13 Jan 2007 : 12:59:54
I think that every group make mistakes especially when you use rules for things that you don't do much. :) |
| Grimbolt Hammerhand |
Posted - 13 Jan 2007 : 10:36:52
We play 3.5, no house rules, because they tend to make the game unbalanced. But we use a lot of the rule variants from the DMG and the PHB, for example the critical miss and hit rules.
Also I have to say that we sometimes make mistakes, which means that we create house rules unwillingly  |
| boddynock |
Posted - 13 Jan 2007 : 09:17:16
I use the same tactic as Reefy. I play 3'rd edition with elements of 3.5. I also use a few house rules wich I will explain somewhere else on the message board. |
| Ranin |
Posted - 01 Jan 2007 : 03:26:17
I'm not actually familiar with any version, would someone be able to quickly explain them to me? |
| Rollo Ruttikin |
Posted - 01 Jan 2007 : 03:09:43
I guess after thinking about it, the artwork on the covers was fantastic. Even the old Player's Handbook with the guys crawling all over the horned idol prying out gems as other people in their band hauled away dead lizardmen and plotted strategy over a map or scroll. What a mood setter!
The ineterior artwork was like looking at old woodcuts. for some reason, this just sets a mood for me and that is always important in roleplaying. At least it is for me.
When the FR stuff came out it was printed on paper that looked like parchment or vellum and I always thought that was cool as Icewind Dale.
|
| silverwizard |
Posted - 31 Dec 2006 : 17:30:19
Dragonsfoot (www.dragonsfoot.org) is considered the best place to look for all things OOP, and also has a "players wanted" section in the forums.
I get the same feeling of nostalgia when reading older material. In fact, nowadays I hardly read any 3.X stuff at all. |
| Rollo Ruttikin |
Posted - 30 Dec 2006 : 21:05:53
My friends and I still play the old Gary Gygax AD&D version with a few 2nd edition elements thrown in such as skills. Call me crazy, but there seems to be a "mood" with the AD&D books that I just don't get with any of the new editions. Maybe it's the texture of the paper, I don't know.
Whatever, we played an extensive campaign that ran from Greyhawk and when my buddy picked up the Forgotten Realms boxed set, we were all instantly hooked.
We would like to find some people who wouldn't mind gaming with the old AD&D rules to join us since our gaming group has shrunk considerably. I'm beginning to think it's all just fond memories.
Personally, I would give my left arm to have a character in an Ed Greenwood run campaign. That guy is a genius! May his beard grow ever longer!!
|
| Julian Grimm |
Posted - 11 Sep 2006 : 19:06:28
I play Castles and Crusades (mixed with a bit of 2e) and Faerun fits very nicely into the system. Been using it for months now and never had a problem. |
| Thangorn |
Posted - 11 Sep 2006 : 13:00:00
For pen & paper we use 2nd Edition: Players Option for my group.. I've been using 2nd Edition for nearly 18 years.. I see no reason to switch over now considering we have pretty much every 2nd Ed manual in our gaming library.
We steal stuff from any ruleset we think adds the most immersion and depth of play, plus like any good roleplayers, we make stuff up
For online stuff we use 3.5 with the occassional 3.0 throw back..
|
| Sanishiver |
Posted - 10 Sep 2006 : 22:49:12
I currently play 3.5 and have been using Third Edition for about six years.
I’ve found 3E to be the only rules system that can ‘keep up’ with the huge variety of creatures, magic and lore that the Realms contains. I’ve found it to be vastly more balanced, structured and player-centric than previous rules sets.
With 3.5 you can really cut loose as a player in the Realms. As a group the players I’ve DMed for over the last six years have exercised their right to choose amongst the vast array of character advancement choices the game provides and so have formed an exceptionally effective team of eight (now Epic) PC adventurers.
As a DM I’ve learned I have just as many options as my players. The rules work equally well for both DM and player, after all. Additionally, I have the ability to modify and expand upon the core mechanics of the game, which allows me great leeway as a DM to create what I want. The work of various D20 publishers (thank you Monte Cook and Sword & Sorcery!) in this regard are a large part of what has allowed me to reflect in my Realms the huge variety of setting elements I mentioned at the top of this post.
In my experience the game mechanics (particularly feats) utilized by players are not only a welcome set of choices (choosing is fun, and having fun is the point of the game) but are also necessary to build a character that can survive and be effective in play. Thus I respectfully disagree with Dan’s powergaming assessment, in the sense that this style of play is not the only style the game caters to, much less encourages.
3E is about giving players and DMs more choices. It’s designed to fit multiple gaming styles and to model (in a balanced way) vai game-mechanics the limitless variety of things players and DMs can think up.
That said I begrudge no one for their choice of game system. If you play it and have fun, then keep having fun I say!
J. Grenemyer |
| Dewaint |
Posted - 10 Sep 2006 : 12:32:52
my campaign is a longlasting one (since 1988). So there are many NPCs, creatures, items and spells from that good old times  .
The rules we use are 3.5, but many things are converted from 1st/2nd and it does not bother me if something is "overpowered" or so called "broken". Those relicts(i mean the "broken" ones) are from older editions and extremely rare or dangerous to use (manly because other guys are searching for these items/spells).
I think the most valueable edition for the FR is the 2nd, but the simplifications (experience and level advacement, BAB, saves, multiclassing) and PrC, Feat and Abilities (i.e. su, ex, sp) system make the 3.5 rule set the most "logical" ever created for (A)DnD.
No offense meant to anyone, it is just my personal oppinion  |
| idan_mor |
Posted - 10 Sep 2006 : 07:37:25
In my campaing I used 3.5. I found it better than the 3rd edition since there were a few rules there that were not clear(well I think that actually the 3.5 is unclear on alot of cases too...well if anyone truely knows how to bullrush or overrun PM me o.k? only a joke...). I also use only core rules as I dont like all that complete X to Y or Fluffy marshemlo of doom #3 or whatever they come with next. I like the miniatures though.
And I think that when I am graduate the univ. (3 years from now :( ) I will also convert my game to 6.9 edition I have read they it has some nice miniatures and d3.1456 and weell balanced class system(all 29.2 billion) than again I it is likely to be more like 7.5beta when I will graduate. |
| GothicDan |
Posted - 09 Sep 2006 : 22:56:47
quote:
Bah. Powergaming has little to do with the system, and a whole lot to do with the player. Unless you make every single character identical, those who are inclined to do so will find ways to powergame.
See my quote above about DM style. It applies.
I am talking about the game system, not those who play it. :) Obviously those who wrote the Game of Thrones book felt the same.
And I don't see what's wrong with every single character being almost the same, mechanically. That's not what really makes an interesting character, is it?
I am talking about the RAW - thus, assuming that the DM automatically allows everything to work as in the RAW. That's how I analyze a game system. That's how a game system itself can directly influence a style of play. If an entire generation of roleplayers learns from the books, they are less likely to deny things in the RAW, unless they have other input (from older players - from earlier editions, usually) telling them how the flavor of a specific aspect of the game was meant to be.
It's about philosophy and mindset. For instance, the WoD system doesn't award EXP for direct combat. It's not WRITTEN that it happens; storytellers are free to give EXP as they see fit. I really, really like that. I think that it naturally promotes active roleplay in those learning to play the games from the books themselves, rather than from older, more experienced players.
Another example of how mechanics can innately influence the specific theme or feel of a given setting is the Wheel of Time RPG. The magic system presented therein is obviously better suited to the magic of the world. It would feel completely artificial to try to graft D&D's magic system onto it as-is. |
| Kalin Agrivar |
Posted - 09 Sep 2006 : 22:52:26
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Bah. Powergaming has little to do with the system, and a whole lot to do with the player. Unless you make every single character identical, those who are inclined to do so will find ways to powergame.
amen...power gaming is all about a players attitude and what the DM allows in the game...simple as that |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 09 Sep 2006 : 21:17:41
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
Truthfully, the best D20 system I've seen in a long time is A Game of Thrones. I really love how they said, right out, "We took out feats that promoted powergaming."
Bah. Powergaming has little to do with the system, and a whole lot to do with the player. Unless you make every single character identical, those who are inclined to do so will find ways to powergame. |
