D&D... what are you playing?

[Nerfed]

So, D&D 4e has had some time out to give people a chance to try it out and make up their minds about it... and I was wondering, what is everyone playing (if anything)?

I tried to cover all the bases. Feel free to explain what system you're playing with, whether or not you're using expanded and/or house rules, preferred campaign/setting, and why you're sticking with that setup.


Basic D&D (old, old school rules)
AD&D 1e
AD&D 2e
D&D 3.x
Pathfinder (D20 3.75e)
True 20 (an offshoot of 3.x D20 rules)
D&D 4e
other game system
don't play pen & paper RPGs

[Tsarmina]

I don't play but I do inquire as to how AM's game is going. Does that count?

[Amoeba Man]

Currently the only face to face PnP RPG I play is D&D 4e. That's what the DM wants to run, so that's what we play. There is talk about playing a 3.5 game, and I tried to plant the seeds for starting a game using the latest edition of Traveller, but nothing has come of it.

Given my choice I'd like to be playing Champions.

[bpphantom]

Currently I'm in 3 PnP 3.5 campaigns, but I anticipate one ending and the next one starting will be 3.75 (Pathfinder) because I'll be running it, and I like Pathfinder.

[Masked Revenger]

Pathfinder is pretty good, but I personally think I would just stick with 3.5, or even True 20, if I wanted a different 3.5 system.

However, my current game, that I am DMing, is 4e, and that's what I voted for. I love 3.5, don't get me wrong, it was tons of fun. But, 4e is also tons of fun, and to me, that's the most important part of a game.

Also, I've been running this game for a few weeks now, and so far it doesn't "feel" any different than other D&D games I've run. In fact, if anything, it's a little more exciting. Skill Challenges allow me to run RP encounters that my non-RP players can get into, while my PR players can still act their way through the scene. The new combat rules make combat a LOT more dynamic. With the new power systems, my players are forced to actually study the position of all the monsters and other players to maximize their effects. People actually MOVE in combat now, rather than just stand there and slug it out with the monsters. It's awesome.

So, while I love my 3.5 books, and am not getting rid of them, I'm sticking with 4e for now. I'd probably pull out my 3.5 books if I wanted to play something a little more off the wall, like a post-apolocyptic D&D game, with no magic but tons of vehiciles and guns. 3.5 if awesome for stuff like that. :)

:mr: Chris

[Plasma Wisp]

D&D 3.5 Bare (PHB, DMG, MMs)

and I gm a Mutants and Masterminds game (2nd Ed)

[Knightward]

Right now I'm in a 3.5ish game (DM and another friend in the game are working on a "D20 Advanced" system and we're in the process of beta-testing it) and a Scion game. There's a few others, but they're more or less on hold for now.

[Half Life]

Ive been enjoying 4E. Has its flaws but also has quite a few things that I enjoy about it more than I did in 3.5. I think 4E is going to really blossom into a great game and I look forward to it.

[Quakester]

I played some 4E but the combat takes entirely too long and the classes are a bit too similar. We went back to 3.5

[The Widowed]

Even as a veteran of Red Box D&D and AD&D, I had to admit that D&D 3.0 brought a ton of much-needed fixes to D&D and simplified things like Armor Class and saving throws while implementing an actual skills system. The Feats were a handy bonus and another means of customizing characters.

I'm not seeing any much-needed changes in D&D 4.0. So I'll just stay where I am, thanks.

[The Icy One]

I'm a Deadlands and Savage Worlds player, though when I play D&D with friends it's the third edition.

[Nerfed]

While I like the direction that Pathfinder is taking with their D&D 3.75 and may adopt some of its changes as house rules, I'm pretty firmly entrenched in the 3.5e rules and like it in spite of the complexity of combat that 4e fans seem to complain about. Also, my players are quite happy with that edition and scoff at the new 4e stuff more than I do.

[Masked Revenger]

I'm a Deadlands and Savage Worlds player, though when I play D&D with friends it's the third edition.

Oh, man, I *LOVE* Savage Worlds. This has to be one of my all time favorite game systems.

Just thought I'd throw that out there. :)

:mr: Chris

[Lady A]

MSH Classic right now doing a DC Legacies game, but after that Castles & Crusades, the ONLY D&D for me :)

[Knightward]

While I like the direction that Pathfinder is taking with their D&D 3.75 and may adopt some of its changes as house rules, I'm pretty firmly entrenched in the 3.5e rules and like it in spite of the complexity of combat that 4e fans seem to complain about. Also, my players are quite happy with that edition and scoff at the new 4e stuff more than I do.

I'm yet to see anyone call 4th ed. D&D, interestingly enough. Honestly I'm kinda hoping 4th's immensely poor reception will help with the success of my friends' system once it gets to the point of publication.

[Masked Revenger]

I'm yet to see anyone call 4th ed. D&D, interestingly enough. Honestly I'm kinda hoping 4th's immensely poor reception will help with the success of my friends' system once it gets to the point of publication.

I'm not sure I understand this statement. What does "anyone call 4th ed. D&D" mean? That people are calling it 4E and NOT D&D? BFD. No one called it D&D when 3E first came out, either. It was 3E. Then it was 3.5. It took a while before it was just plain ol' D&D. It will take a while with 4E as well.

Also, I'm not sure what game store's your going to, but the ones around here are seeing pretty good sales in 4E stuff. As in, sold out of stuff sales. It's getting a pretty good reception, from what I can tell.

Also, I want to say this. When 3E first came out, the D&D community was on fire. This was the worst thing that ever happened to the game, as far as some were concerned. "Why change what wasn't broken?" people said. "Feats? What the hell are these? I'm not playing a video game, I'm playing a ROLE PLAYING game," people shouted. "They're only trying to make more money off us," people bemoned. And now 4E is here, and I'm hearing all the same arguements.

Now, me, like I said, I love 3E, and 3.5 (another update where people bitched). I'm keeping my 3.5 books and supliments. Well, most of 'em anyway. I may even play it again, I have plenty of friends that are into the system as well.

But, that said... 4E is awesome and a ton of fun to play. And, as far as I'm concerned, that's the whole point of playing a game, to have fun. Personally, I like trying out new things, and 4E has seen some vast improvements to my game (like, for example, battles become FAR more dynamic, and stopped being static slug-fests), and not once has it felt like playing a video game. Not once has it not felt like playing D&D. It's STILL D&D. It feels like D&D. In fact, it hardly feels that different than 3E.

Okay, I guess that turned into a mini-rant there. I'll just end here.

:mr: Chris

[Quakester]

MSH Classic right now doing a DC Legacies game, but after that Castles & Crusades, the ONLY D&D for me :)

If only I could find a group to play MSH classic around me. Ah well.

[Nerfed]

Also, I want to say this. When 3E first came out, the D&D community was on fire. This was the worst thing that ever happened to the game, as far as some were concerned. "Why change what wasn't broken?" people said. "Feats? What the hell are these? I'm not playing a video game, I'm playing a ROLE PLAYING game," people shouted. "They're only trying to make more money off us," people bemoned. And now 4E is here, and I'm hearing all the same arguements.
I liked 3e when it came out. I thought the feats were the best part since they really helped distinguish characters of the same class from each other.

If only I could find a group to play MSH classic around me. Ah well.
Move to Jersey. I'll play. :cool:

[Lady A]

If only I could find a group to play MSH classic around me. Ah well.

I tried M&M, I tried Champions, I tried SAS, I tried them all... at one point I had every darn superhero RPG ever published and not one of them could hold a candle to the simplicity and dynamic flow of MSH Classic. No it isn't perfect and we have housed ruled it a lot playing it for well over 20 years now, but I can teach a newbie to RPGs how to play in 20 mins.

Castles & Crusades achieves the exact same thing for me with D&D, yes it is a bastard child of AD&D, but I liked AD&D :)

[Poison]

I started with AD&D 2nd ed. I still love it. But I've gotten used to D&D 3rd. Never tried 4th so far.

And I always loved the Marvel RPG system. Very flexibel, yet simple.

[Nerfed]

Some people find the Champions RPG superior for its detail... I like Marvel better because of its simplicity. And I think Lady A is going overboard with her assessment of 20 minutes to teach someone to play it. I think you can teach a non-roleplayer enough to play the game in 5 minutes.

[Akamaz]

so far 3.X is what i am currently playing,. in the next few weeks i should be starting in a True20 campaign tho so i'll be able to see how i like that.


Champions will always have a special place in my heart though... sure some aspects were more complex than ADnD but that level of customisation is to die for!

[Masked Revenger]

All you MSH fans should check this out. I think you'll like it.

http://www.lulu.com/content/1337000

:mr: Chris

[Nerfed]

Ummm...

[Nerfed]

...neat.

[WingedAvenger]

*votes*

*looks at thread*

Traitors.

[Graphite]

Shadowrun FTW. Painful system, though I haven't tried 4e in action.
Hands down White World had the best world.