[super sorcerer]

While 3.5 is very similar to 3, and 3 is just improvment and expansion of 2, the 4th edition of dnd is not an improvment of 3.5rd edition but a completely different game.
In 4th edition a fireball can't kill a 1st level goblin. A 30th level character can't kil a 5th level character with a single shot. A PC and a NPC of the same class and level are completly different in power.

I have a few problems of game logic in some rules that make no sense to me it terms of how the world work, so I would be happy of any answer for the folowing questions:
1) Why a 9th level NPC wizard is not capable of casting as many spells an a 9th level PC wizard?
2) How come most of the monster power are rechargable while PC never have any power that work that way (in 3rd eddition the only rechargable power is breath weapons)?
3) Why there is no way for a character to craft a longsword?
4) Why a 30th level fighter know as much about arcana knowledge as a 10th level wizard even though he never learned anything about it?

Most of the rules of 3.5rd edition are sensible with simple logic, and those who don't are easily changable.

Another reason why I prefer 3.5rd edition is the options of characters. There are many more posible characters in the 20 levels of 3.5 PHB than there are in 4 PHB. There is almost nothing a monster can do that a character can't do in 3.5 unlike 4th edition (such as death powers, which is unavalible to any character but can be used more than once per encounter for bodak and orcus or petrification effects that many monsters can use), Notice that in 3.5rd edition powers are avalible for characters (more than 90% of the spell-like abilities in the monster manual produce a spell from the player's handbook.

The only advantage I see in 4th edition is that most characters of the same level are about equaly powerfull (in 3.5rd edition bards are weaker in combat than other characters).

This post has been edited by super sorcerer: 06 August 2008 - 03:19 PM

[Axel]

super sorcerer, on Aug 6 2008, 10:47 AM, said:

While 3.5 is very similar to 3, and 3 is just improvment and expansion of 2,

This is outright nonsense. 3rd has almost nothing in common with 2nd. You're thinking of the relation between AD&D to D&D or AD&D 2nd to 1st.
As to the rest, I know nothing about fourth until I can have a copy of the books. By which I mean go back to school where the sci-fi club will buy them because I'm way to cheap to shell out.

[Evilbane]

1.I disagree a 9th lvl NPC can have the same power as a 9th Lvl PC unless ur forcably making the NPC weaker.
2.And ur doing something wrong if ur lvl 30 cant 1 shot a lvl 5

3. Why would u want 2 make a long sword thats like a starting weapon, but i see ur point there is no craft skill. Besides most people i know didnt usee the craft skill anyways is was sort of broken. If you really want to make things it shouldnt be hard at all for you(if ur DM) or ur DM to come up with a way 2 craft things.

4.and how does ur fighter at lvl 30 have the magic power of a lvl 10??

The only way to do that is 2 make ur fighters epic destiny an Eternal Seeker. Even then your not a spell caster.. ur just a warrior that can shoot fireballs and stuff and thats only if u have the required attributes to do so.

"Seeker of the Many Paths (21st level): When
you gain a class encounter or daily power by gaining a
level, you can choose your new power from any class.
Learning a power doesn't necessarily equip you
with all the attributes required to use the power. For
example, a fighter who learns a wizard spell as an
Eternal Seeker would not gain the ability to use implements
that make casting wizard spells more effective.
Therefore, you're usually better off learning powers
that are compatible with what you already know."

If you dont like the fact that there are less Class/Race choice make some up. Races arnt hard and Classes just require some more thinking since u need all the new kinds of spells and abiltys. Shouldnt be that hard.

You could migrate Bards and stuff that is missing easily half the character is made already.

This post has been edited by Evilbane: 08 August 2008 - 04:38 AM

[Dthclaw]

The Grammar Natzee in me wants to trout-slap people that use "ur" in place of "you're," since "ur" means "first" and just because this is an online forum doesn't mean people should forget the basics of kindergarten-level English, but I digress...

My initial impressions of 4E (from what I can glean from the hideously poor Web 2.0 presentation that is the 4E PHB) is that they basically did the same thing that happened between 2E and 3E - a complete revision of basic rules from the ground up, to the point where there's little ability to directly compare the two. With 3E many things were fixed, but many new problems cropped up because of a cumbersome and similarly idiosyncratic ruleset. Unfortunately, 4E seems to have thrown the baby out with the bathwater - everything hasn't just been simplified, it seems practically lobotomized. At the same time, I don't see any reason why the balance issues inherent to any exponential power curve system (and make no mistake, a d20 linear system has exponential power) would vanish with 4E.

As to your questions, super, I can only surmise the following on a point by point basis. Bear in mind that I have limited understanding of 4E and may make factual mistakes with regards to rules-as-written (RAW).

1- Wizards of the Coast takes the approach of 'players are special.' Not a bad philosophy, but they let it grow too deeply into the ruleset. Thus, NPCs must be designed to be inherently inferior to PCs. That's just the way they work, and by limiting GM options they keep tighter control over their content and make it harder to be independent from their line of thought (think about it - why did they wait until the MIC to explain the logic behind the idiosyncratic numbers for wealth by level? Because 4E was just around the corner and content control became less of an issue)

2- Towards the twilight of 3.5E, Wizards actually started to include a lot of rechargeable abilities. Classes like the Factotum, for example, or the Tome of Nine Swords classes and technique stuff. Again, they even admitted that this was lead-up to 4E mechanics.

3- Because Wizards doesn't view D&D as an RPG, they view it as a pen-and-paper Diablo or World of Warcraft. Part of the reason that skills like Craft were so neglected in playtesting in 3/3.5 and so much of the ruleset focused on tactical combat.

4- Because Wizards lobotomized skills in 4E. Remove customization in the name of balance, and in the process remove logic and flavor. It's all rather Orwellian, actually, excising thought from the process of designing characters. Fortunately we're not forced to use 4E.

Basically, super, I feel your pain. Part of the reason why I don't plan to switch and why I'm creating a d6 alternative system

[super sorcerer]

Evilbane, on Aug 8 2008, 07:37 AM, said:

1.I disagree a 9th lvl NPC can have the same power as a 9th Lvl PC unless ur forcably making the NPC weaker.
2.And ur doing something wrong if ur lvl 30 cant 1 shot a lvl 5

3. Why would u want 2 make a long sword thats like a starting weapon, but i see ur point there is no craft skill. Besides most people i know didnt usee the craft skill anyways is was sort of broken. If you really want to make things it shouldnt be hard at all for you(if ur DM) or ur DM to come up with a way 2 craft things.

4.and how does ur fighter at lvl 30 have the magic power of a lvl 10??

The only way to do that is 2 make ur fighters epic destiny an Eternal Seeker. Even then your not a spell caster.. ur just a warrior that can shoot fireballs and stuff and thats only if u have the required attributes to do so.

"Seeker of the Many Paths (21st level): When
you gain a class encounter or daily power by gaining a
level, you can choose your new power from any class.
Learning a power doesn't necessarily equip you
with all the attributes required to use the power. For
example, a fighter who learns a wizard spell as an
Eternal Seeker would not gain the ability to use implements
that make casting wizard spells more effective.
Therefore, you're usually better off learning powers
that are compatible with what you already know."

If you dont like the fact that there are less Class/Race choice make some up. Races arnt hard and Classes just require some more thinking since u need all the new kinds of spells and abiltys. Shouldnt be that hard.

You could migrate Bards and stuff that is missing easily half the character is made already.

well if you must know then:
1) In the DMG is sais simply that an NPC character of the heroic tier have 1 at will power, 1 daily power of their class, 1 encounter power of their class and 1 utility power of their class. A 9th level PC have 2 at-will powers, 3 daily powers, 3 encounter powers and 2 utility powers. why a 9th level NPC wizard know less than half the number of spells a PC wizard knows?
As for PC better than NPC it is anyway happening in equipment, feats, healing surges and action points.
2)A 5th level fighter have at least 51 HP (assuming he have only 12 con and he didn't take the toughness feat). no at-will power on epic levels can deal more than 40 damage unless it is a critical hit with a high crit weapon or a vorpal weapon (the best is 2d12+16 which maximum is 40). An encounter power that deals 5[w] damage made with a +6 greataxe with a streangth score of 30 (starting 20 adding 8 through levels and another +2 if he choose the demigod epic destiny) deals an avarage of 48.5 HP which is still lower than 51. A 21th level wizard who cast meteor swarm deals 8d6+15 (asuming int 28 and a +6 implement)for an avarage of 43 HP which is still lower than 51. I am well aware that the most powerfull daily power avalible to a 30th level fighter/paladin can kill a 5th level fighter with a single shot, but I do not assume any 30th level character will spend their most powerfull daily power on a 5th level fighter (which is still not enough for a wizard as I showed before). Notice that an NPC fighter have 52 Hp if they have only 12 constitution.
4) I didn't say that he is a better spellcaster. I said he knows nore about magic. His arcana score is higher and what you know about magic it tested through arcana check.

As for you Dthclaw I thank you for your simpathy and I think I will resume playing 3.5 edition like you .
I think I will realy take the idea of reacargable items to 3.5rd edition and make some for the party, and I will look at the material you mentioned and I thank you very much for that.

[Dthclaw]

No prob, super.

[Torap]

So your saying don't waste my time on 4?

[Cuilean]

The general consensus I've seen is "Don't think of 4e as D&D."

It's a completely different game system laid on top of the same base world.

Our group might play it once in a while, but our main games are going to be 3.5e.

[Dthclaw]

I would say don't waste your time, Torap. If you're looking for a system that's decently balanced for hack-and-slash, 4E might fit your bill. Then again, so would World of Warcraft, Neverwinter Nights... actually, just about any decent video game RPG would offer you equivalent or superior hack-and-slash ability and without the annoying number grinding.

I'm not convinced it's even based on D&D lore, Cuilean. I mean, Gnomes are monsters, dragonfolk and tieflings are base races, there's no bard or druid class... it just doesn't seem to share anything in common with the past versions except the name.

[Torap]

I just got my hands on 4e and in the first 2 minutes i see a HUGE problem in relation to d&d lore... Liniar Alignments. So in esence, the Blood War just became mass demonic/deamonic/devilish genacide with no purpose. Not that I have a problem with that, but... Its just... it ruins 76.3% of my plots.
Not even dealing with the the races issue yet... And how do they justify puting a warlock in the base class list and kicking a druid....... someone please cast resurection on my will to play in about 6 months or so.....

[Hawkofthemay]

Torap, on Aug 29 2009, 11:07 PM, said:

I just got my hands on 4e and in the first 2 minutes i see a HUGE problem in relation to d&d lore... Liniar Alignments. So in esence, the Blood War just became mass demonic/deamonic/devilish genacide with no purpose. Not that I have a problem with that, but... Its just... it ruins 76.3% of my plots.
Not even dealing with the the races issue yet... And how do they justify puting a warlock in the base class list and kicking a druid....... someone please cast resurection on my will to play in about 6 months or so.....

I hate to tell you this but what from I've seen they threw away the Blood War as well. Its just another example of WotC throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

That being said, there are a number of things you can do to keep your plots. Use the old alignment system, give another reason for the Blood War, or don't switch to 4e. The plots are more important then the rules are.

[Torap]

Hawkofthemay, on Aug 30 2009, 10:13 AM, said:

I hate to tell you this but what from I've seen they threw away the Blood War as well. Its just another example of WotC throwing the baby out with the bathwater....

No bloodwar... NOOOOOOOoooooo........!!! And it screws over the WHOLE dragon montage I was making.
Screw it. I'll be the first to admit my initial reaction to the DMG3.5 alternated between confution and bordom(mostly me being fish), but with the 4e, i swear I can FEEL the raincells dying. The first 10 pages of 3.5 got expanded out to 33 pages in 4e, And most of it is just crap about the people you play with that you really need to figure out on your own anyway.

Not swiching my edition anytime in the divinable futer(With confirmation by comunion with Vecna)

[Killergold88]

Ive looked over 4th edition, and to me it feels more like WotC trying to create a table-top game that sucks in all of the WoW players, though Im not a big fan of the 3rd ed rules either id say they are more solid than most. I got my start with AD&D 2nd, but not enough people know how to play that now save a few.
So I just usually cut and paste where i feel needed, but that's the beauty of being a storyteller... you can do that! all of my players get way more enjoyment out of my translated 3rd ed rules, plus i don't use minis either, all i need is a couple character sheets, a dry erase board, some colored markers, some friends, and the books and I'm good all night.

[Killergold88]

Ive looked over 4th edition, and to me it feels more like WotC trying to create a table-top game that sucks in all of the WoW players, though Im not a big fan of the 3rd ed rules either id say they are more solid than most. I got my start with AD&D 2nd, but not enough people know how to play that now save a few.
So I just usually cut and paste where i feel needed, but that's the beauty of being a storyteller... you can do that! all of my players get way more enjoyment out of my translated 3rd ed rules, plus i don't use minis either, all i need is a couple character sheets, a dry erase board, some colored markers, some friends, and the books and I'm good all night.