D&D 4th Edition?

[true_edges]

To my geeky friends, I need your help.  I have a finite amount of money to spend on some rulebooks but I'm still not too sure what I want to get since I only have enough for one set of books.  3.5 or 4?  I'm looking to get some new future gamers into D&D.  Other than myself there's maybe one other with any experience with the game.  I've been

Comments

D&D books

[goth_bunnyy]

If it can wait a few days, I'll check my records, I may have ALL the 3.5 books as PDFs.

Re: D&D books

[true_edges]

I may or may not have a copy myself of the PDFs but what I really want is the hard bound books. When I'm gaming I like to have the books to pass around rather than everyone gathering around the computer. So, the quest continues...

[jaligard]

I haven't played the D&D in a year or so, but I can tell you that the new edition, 4th Edition, doesn't even look like D&D to me. I know if I ever go back to playing D&D, it will be with 3.5 and not 4. It's like a bastardized version of World of Warcraft and D&D.

I know one person that continues to play it after trying it out and one person that tried it out and sold his Player's Handbook as soon as he could.

[true_edges]

There's some good and some bad in being like World of Warcraft. The use of making each class balanced is good. I like the idea of wizards finally being able to do more than just a few shining moments. I like that a Cleric is more than just a healing machine. Still, I do want to play like in the old days with role playing fun rather than strict combat oriented rules.

[4sprinkles]

I got my brother 4th ed. for Christmas (OK, I got him the Players HB and the grandparents got him the rest...) so if I'm going to be playing in the near future, it's probably going to be 4th edition. My vote would be 4th so I won't get confused (if you're going to invite me to play, that is! ;) )

[radiumx]

I haven't read a D&D rulebook for ages. If you need another for your campaign... well...

...
You have my axe!

[dr_mrow]

I played my first game of 4.0 on Friday. I won't say it felt like Warcrack, since I haven't played that, but I will say it felt like Diablo 2. The tactical movement rules are more "interesting" (as compared with "I swing at the orc. Again."), but play in a very artificial way. All of the classes have parallel mechanics (2 at-will attacks, plus a few once/battle or once/day attacks), so wizards can throw magic missiles every round, which makes them fairly interchangeable with archers. The need to put all of these abilities for these skills in the player's handbooks limits the number of tracks and customizability. So there's no option for a defensive cleric or a Swiss-army-knife wizard, and no skills without combat utility. No skill for brewing, fletching, dancing, sailing, etc. Probably half the well-developed characters I made for 3.5 can't translate to 4.0

[dr_mrow]

I have to laugh a little at this comment because while this was well thought out and honest to both systems it still doesn't give me a clear choice. I could go with 4th and have an easy time with new players. Like you say, the lack of customization makes it so no one goes into a pitfall. However, the customization and prestige classes were what the game was all about for me. Hmmm, even though the hard time teaching new people I might go with 3.5...

[dr_mrow]

For me, the fatal flaw in 4.0 is that the rules actively get in the way of making an interesting non-standard character. And "easy for newbies to learn" seems to translate to "lacks depth after a short while."But then, I run and enjoy games where you pick up a d20 a couple times a night.

If you want to go 4th ed heavy-roleplay, you could always houserule the absent skills, let people take abilities from other classes, etc.