What version do you play? (DnD)

[Kizara]

So, I'm just curious here. What version of DnD (only applicable to those that play DnD, obviously) do you play?

Even if you are currently between-campaigns/groups, what version would you prefer to be playing if you were able to?

Although you are welcome to briefly state why you like your version of choice, I would encourage people not to debate the merits of each edition too much here, and to limit the number of posts they make in this thread, which is mainly meant to be a poll. This is also meant to address the question of "what version do these forums most favor?".
(if I could just make a bloody poll, I would)

1) 4E. You like and embrace the new edition, and intend on continuing to play it.

2) 3.5E. You like the previous, more complex edition and intend on continuing to play it with only minor alterations if any.

3) 3.5E with major houseruling/alternate systems such as Pathfinder or Frank's Tome series or your own personal project. If your houserules are more then, say, 5 pages long, you probably belong in this catagory.

4) 3.0E You didn't care for the upgrade, so you still largely play RAW 3.0E and are happy doing so. Note that if you mix some 3.0 and 3.5 elements but it isn't largely unmodified 3.0, you likely belong in #2 (maybe #3).

5) AD&D 2E with players options and other supplimental materials. Possibly including large amounts of homebrew or fan-made content. You are very happy with the game you or your parents grew up with and intend on continuing to enjoy it regardless of what new things this 'WotC' puts out.

6) BD&D with little to no modifications. You just play this oldschool game without all the suppliments or fuss others may make of it and enjoy it.

7) AD&D 1E or other old versions. You like the classic game, and don't see the value of what has 'evolved' from it. You like your elf and see no reason to move on to newer things.


Tally:

1) Dhavaer, Oracle_Hunter, Charity, RebelRogue, Starsinger, Glug, ColdSepp, Eorran, Britter, Tadanori Oyama, Gryndle, Dentarthur, Tengu_temp, Isomenes, Beleriphon, erikun, acirruscloud, Skyserpent, Gralamin, Aenghus, Erk, TwoBitWriter, nowiwantmydmg, DM Raven
Total: 22

2) Slaanesh, Ascension, black dragoon, Jack Zander, ghost_warlock, Adumbration, Albonor, monty, Ent, Frosty, *****, NEO|Phyte, Eldan, Erothayce, Kurald Galain, AslanCross, Krimm_Blackleaf, Gerrtt, vegetalss4, Shazzbaa, Teron, Xenogears, Roog, Oslecamo, Thurbane, Sirek Inta, Vortling, DigoDragon, only1doug
Total: 29

3) Kizara, Break, thegurullamen, Wolfpack, Mastikator, arguskos, drengnikrafe, SeeKay, Edea, BobVosh, Ashtar, bosssmiley, DeathQuaker, Quirinus_Obsidian, Areswargod139, Tehnar
Total: 16

4) Thrud
Total: 1

5) Swordguy, Matthew, Thane of Fife, Tormsskull, Mark Hall
Total: 5

6) (empty)
Total: 0

7) nagora, ken-do-nim
Total: 2

So, share your preferences with the board!

[Inhuman Bot]

I would mostly be in 3.5 stragiht up, but also abit in 4e.

Why in 4e? Sometimesd I want a simple hack and slash, that I can enjoy over some dice with friends and pizza.

Why 3.5? It's what I grew up with. It's what I read when I was sick, hoarded money to buy, and loved, at least as much as any videogame, probly more. It's our world, and we want to go adventuring, maybe Eberron, maybe Iron kingdoms...:smallsmile: good times... Which I can still enjoy!:smallbiggrin:

[Ascension]

2.) 3.5. I'm not violently opposed to 4E, but I don't plan to switch until I can't find any 3.5 players anywhere... which pretty much means I don't plan to switch at all.

[Break]

3.5 with a fair amount of houseruling, mostly in class abilities - I suppose this places me in camp #3. I'll play 4E occasionally, but it simply doesn't have the qualities that make it my go-to edition, as I'm rather torn about it.

[black dragoon]

3.5 with houseruling here and there. I've also played a little 2nd andhave vaguely considered 4E.

[Dhavaer]

1) and 2).

[Kizara]

1) and 2).

Please pick your strongest preferance. I want people to consider this a poll and I won't get accurate results if people can 'vote twice.'

It's fine if you share your thoughts on how you also like *other choice*, but I DO need you to pick one, please. :)

[Matthew]

Categories should probably be...

OD&D
AD&D 1e
BD&D
AD&D 2e

...but I digress.

I generally play a mix of BD&D/AD&D, with a bit of C&C thrown in.

[Kizara]

Categories should probably be...

OD&D
AD&D 1e
BD&D
AD&D 2e

...but I digress.

I generally play a mix of BD&D/AD&D, with a bit of C&C thrown in.

So, choice 7? Sorry if its not completely accurate, my own ignorance in that matter is the cause of such. I also don't want too many very similar choices.

[Matthew]

So, choice 7? Sorry if its not completely accurate, my own ignorance in that matter is the cause of such. I also don't want too many very similar choices.

I would probably have to say #5 or #6. AD&D 2e is the most forgiving as regards whether you're still playing AD&D or not (since it is intended to be house ruled to hell and back). AD&D 1e is more likely to take a hard line; the problem is that a large number of gamers started with BD&D and moved onto AD&D, but didn't necessarily entirely adopt the workings of the latter. Very confusing, I admit. :smallbiggrin:

[Kizara]

I would probably have to say #5 or #6. AD&D 2e is the most forgiving as regards whether you're still playing AD&D or not (since it is intended to be house ruled to hell and back). AD&D 1e is more likely to take a hard line; the problem is that a large number of gamers started with BD&D and moved onto AD&D, but didn't necessarily entirely adopt the workings of the latter. Very confusing, I admit. :smallbiggrin:

How would you phrase choices 5, 6 and 7? I want this to be fair to people like you with your gaming preferances but lack the knowledge to comprehensively do so.

[Ponce]

2. I had considered pathfinder or similar things in the future, but haven't gotten around to suggesting them to my group.

[Kaje]

4E, and I'm interested in 2E, but haven't played it. There's pretty much nothing about 3E that I like.

[Matthew]

How would you phrase choices 5, 6 and 7? I want this to be fair to people like you with your gaming preferances but lack the knowledge to comprehensively do so.

Hard to say. Probably:

#5 AD&D 2e

#6 BD&D

#7 AD&D 1e


Most folks who play out of print editions understand what those broad divisions signify, though each could be subdivided further; however, those are the divisions of the subforums at Dragonsfoot, and they seem to work pretty well in that capacity.

[thegurullamen]

Group 3. Go alterations on a great passtime!

[Jack Zander]

Number 2 for me please!

I've never had any of the theoretical problems anyone on these boards seem to have with 3.5 and no one in my group sees any real reason to switch if we're already having fun and don't want to spend any more money.

Also, none of our campaigns ever make it much past 10th level. This is probably because all our DMs (myself included) get lazy after so long and run out of ideas/motivation.

[ghost_warlock]

I'd play 3.5, not sure whether it'd fall into #2 or #3 of your categories above; I tend to homebrew a lot of stuff for any game I play and some of those fall into houserules as much as new content. Traditionally, regarding the published rules, my groups have only made relatively few/small changes (omitting stuff like shivering touch and upgrading some of the weaker classes, such as using the hexblade fix).

[Conjurer]

I'm currently playing both, 4th and 3.5. I'm also mastering 3.5. I was actually pleasantly surprised by 4th, and plan to move my 3rd Edition campaign into 4th as soon as the current story arc finishes.

[Swordguy]

Really, I play all of them BUT #'s 2, 3, and 4.

If I have to narrow this response to just one number, though, I'd go in the end with number 5. - AD&D 2e with supplementary material (mainly the old brown "Complete X" series of books).

[Dhavaer]

Please pick your strongest preferance. I want people to consider this a poll and I won't get accurate results if people can 'vote twice.'

It's fine if you share your thoughts on how you also like *other choice*, but I DO need you to pick one, please. :)

*shrug*

I'll only DM 4e, so I'll go with 1).

[Wolfpack]

Well I fit in 2 most often, and when I'm lucky 3. But 3 is pretty broad, Frank & K are very different then Pathfinder, and I would only ever play one of them.

[Kizara]

Hard to say. Probably:

#5 AD&D 2e

#6 BD&D

#7 AD&D 1e


Most folks who play out of print editions understand what those broad divisions signify, though each could be subdivided further; however, those are the divisions of the subforums at Dragonsfoot, and they seem to work pretty well in that capacity.

Done, thank you. Now, where are you in those options? :)


To others, you have to VOTE for something. I understand it when you talk about your various preferances, but its a poll people.

If you don't know if you fall into 2 or 3, the main premise is if you alter the published material to any great extent. And as I said, if your houserules are longer then like 4-5 pages, you probably fall in there as well.

[Wolfpack]

Done, thank you. Now, where are you in those options? :)


To others, you have to VOTE for something. I understand it when you talk about your various preferances, but its a poll people.

If you don't know if you fall into 2 or 3, the main premise is if you alter the published material to any great extent. And as I said, if your houserules are longer then like 4-5 pages, you probably fall in there as well.

I like to play 3 more then two, but Tome games are far and few between, and I've only ever been in 3 such games. The vast majority run using 3.5 with minor-no alterations.

[Mastikator]

Option 3.
Though I am looking into house ruling the 4th edition heavily too.

[Matthew]

Done, thank you. Now, where are you in those options? :)

No problem. I would be option #5.

[Adumbration]

Option 2: 3.5 E

[Albonor]

Option 2). Minor rules change and style of play. Other than that I kinda like 3.5 as it is.

[Oracle_Hunter]

4e, straight up. It's what I run, and as soon as I can find a game, it's what I'll play too. The powers and class abilities are neat, the mechanics are smooth as silk, and Warlords are awesome.

I do play 3.5, but only 'cause I'm in an ongoing 3.5 game.

Personal Commentary
It's plenty fun, but I keep running into stuff which makes me say "man, this is ridiculous. 4e does it much better." #1 on that list is leveling-up; it seriously took our party a 1/2 hour to level up to 8th level... I'm talking about just doing skill points and picking new spells here. 9th, we just said "level up between sessions."

There is no reason leveling up should take that much time. :smallyuk:

#2 is every time my Rogue runs into something it can't sneak attack. I would turn it into a drinking game, but our sessions are rather long and I'd rather not black out :smalltongue:

[Kizara]

#2 is every time my Rogue runs into something it can't sneak attack. I would turn it into a drinking game, but our sessions are rather long and I'd rather not black out :smalltongue:


Please do not overtly flame other editions or options. I do not want this to turn into a debate/flame thread.

Keep such comments to yourself please. In fact I request that you edit your post.

[monty]

3.5, mostly unmodified. It's the first version I learned (couple of years ago), and I have no reason or desire to switch.

[monty]

Please do not overtly flame other editions or options. I do not want this to turn into a debate/flame thread.

Keep such comments to yourself please. In fact I request that you edit your post.

I really don't see how that's flaming. It looked like a perfectly innocent joke to me.

[Ent]

#2, but I'm trying to get 4e games together. A lot of people are just too familiar/nostalgic to move away from 3.5.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Please do not overtly flame other editions or options. I do not want this to turn into a debate/flame thread.

Keep such comments to yourself please. In fact I request that you edit your post.

Jeez, I was talking about a personal experience. I'd hardly call that "flaming" and were it not for this response post, I wouldn't have posted again.

I'll spoiler it for aesthetic reasons then.

[Thrud]

I pretty much liked 3.0 and felt no real need to expand on that (except houseruling Rangers so they can go bow or 2 weapon route, that just made sense to me.)

My 6 year long campaign that just ended was 3.0 the whole way, with a fair amount of homebrewing, but not specifically stuff from 3.5

Looks like I am the only one here from that camp.

:smallbiggrin:

[Kizara]

Jeez, I was talking about a personal experience. I'd hardly call that "flaming" and were it not for this response post, I wouldn't have posted again.

I'll spoiler it for aesthetic reasons then.

Thank you.

To be more accurate, I found it to be inflammatory in the sense that others would feel provoked and need to post counter-points decrying what you said or other, negative elements of 4e. I know that's how I felt.

I didn't actually take offense at it or find it to be hostile in nature, just possibly causing thread derailment.
Thanks again for your cooperation.

[Frosty]

I'm a 2. I play and run 3.5 games with some houserules and homebrewed classes, but for the most part it's unaltered 3.5

I am playing in one 4e game on the boards, but I'm a through and through 3.5 person.

[aboyd]

I play 3.5 edition, straight. I might do a few houserules, but nothing as massive as Pathfinder, so I can't go into that category. I'm just 3.5 plain.

[NEO|Phyte]

Only get to pick one...

#2, primarily because that's what my RL group uses. I wouldn't mind a switch to 4e, but they're a touch too apathetic/uncaring/lazy/something to change systems. I suspect the main reason my d20 Modern game I somehow got wrangled into running has been such a hit is that it's basically the same system, only with guns and cars and explosives.

[arguskos]

Normally, I'd say I was in #2, but since my current campaign uses mostly Pathfinder Core Class fixes, and some personal updates/fixes, I'm going with #3 for me.

-argus

[drengnikrafe]

I play what we call... "3.87125" (Did I get it right, Grimoire, or did I mess it up again?).

In other words, type 3... "3.5 with huge houserules". Although, we're dipping into 4.0 because it's different.

So, category 3, with dipping into 1 a bit.

[Eldan]

3.5, with Planewalkers 3E Planescape Setting, 2E Planescape fluff, a houseruled magic and planar travel system, belief points homebrew version, faction belief system, some homebrewed spells and prestige classes and more liberal alignment restriction for classes, like Paladins who can be any lawful.
Despite what it sounds like it's still more or less straight 3.5.

[SeeKay]

Group 3. 3.5 with heavy home brew.

I'd consider 4.0 if someone gave me a set of the core books, but I'm not going to invest further in my AD&D/D&D collection for awhile. I've played/DM'ed all of them from 1st ed to 3.5.

[Edea]

I am also in Group 3. I'd prefer a 3.5e baseline with a nice, healthy amount of homebrew/houserules tossed in.

[BobVosh]

I'll play any edition, but I definitely prefer option 3, more specifically pathfinder.

1st ed is close second.

2nd ed after

Then 4th.

Odds>evens :P

[Ashtar]

3) We are going back to my conversion of Dark Sun to 3/3.5 after some Eberron 3.5 and a short stint of 4e which finally failed to convince.

[nagora]

1e. Needs a re-edit and tidy up, but still the best framework.

[Charity]

Stick me in the topslot please #1
Though I'll play pretty much anything to be honest.

[Erothayce]

#2 for me. Because that what's books my group and dm have. And were all broke college and high school students so i don't see us moving anytime soon.

[RebelRogue]

#1 for me, though I can totally see myself doing #2 once in a while.

[Kurald Galain]

1.5) I play both 3.5 and 4, whichever is offered at the time. Although if I were to DM anything, I'd prefer the older one, among others because I prefer combat not to be on a grid.

(edit) I don't have a long list of house rules, I do have a pretty good notion of which spells/feats/prestigeclasses to veto if players request them; which they usually don't anyway, so it's not a big problem.

[Kizara]

1.5) I play both 3.5 and 4, whichever is offered at the time. Although if I were to DM anything, I'd prefer the older one, among others because I prefer combat not to be on a grid.

(edit) I don't have a long list of house rules, I do have a pretty good notion of which spells/feats/prestigeclasses to veto if players request them; which they usually don't anyway, so it's not a big problem.

Put you down as 2 because of your DMing comment.

Note to others (and you): It is a poll. If you don't give me a clear answer I will ethier:
a) Ignore your post
or
b) Guess if a reasonable conclusion can be drawn.

So if you want your voice heard, speak it clearly. :)

[Starsinger]

1) 4E. You like and embrace the new edition, and intend on continuing to play it.

Yes please. Quality and complexity are not mutually inclusive, I prefer something simple and clean to work off of.

[AslanCross]

#2, though I'm willing to play 4E. However, due to my investment in 3.5, I'm likely to continue playing it way into the future.

[Krimm_Blackleaf]

I play 3.5 with reduxes for stuff that's crap by RAW(hexblade, samurai, fighter...) and a ton of homebrew creations. Not sure where that would fit, somewhere between 2 and 3.

[nagora]

Stick me in the topslot please #1
Though I'll play pretty much anything to be honest.
I always knew you were an old slapper!

[Morty]

Sort me under #2. My group really wanted to give 4ed a try, but it's just not for us. So we'll keep playing 3.5 with minor houserules.

[Saph]

Hmm - well, I quite like both 4e and 3.5 for different reasons, but if I had complete freedom about what kind of campaign I wanted to play I'd pick a long-running 3.5 game. So I guess put me down for number 2).

- Saph

[Charity]

I always knew you were an old slapper!

The oldest... and the slapperiest.

[Totally Guy]

I'm DMing 4th right now and enjoying it. Would gladly play as a player if the opportunity presented itself.

I'm running my game as a mystery with fantasy elements. Chases, espionage, politics and combat! (and even a sidequest that was completed with none of those)

[ColdSepp]

Put me down for 4E. (options 1)

I am in a 3.5 game, and enjoy 3.5 as well, but given a choice of editions, I'd go 4E. Its easier to make effective melee builds, and that is what I prefer to play.

[bosssmiley]

#3 for me. I'm a 3.T(ome) gamer.

edit: at the start of page 3 too. How's that for a coincidink?

[Charity]

Too much of a coincidence I call a foul, get him lads

http://johnochwat.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/angry_mob.png

[Gerrtt]

I choose option 2.

[Eorran]

#1 for me. 4e is our new default system, 'cause we're mostly casual gamers and it's easy to set up and play.
I'd play 3.5 or even 3.0 if I had a group, and my favorite games hearken back to the days of 2e yore.

[vegetalss4]

i am a 2. because 3.5 is the only system i am familer enough with to dm. however if someone will explain the rules to me. i will play anything

[Eldariel]

A mix of 3) and 5). If I have to choose, slightly more in 3#, since I tend to base my combinations on 3.5.

[Thane of Fife]

Put me down for #5, please.

[Tormsskull]

I guess I'd be #5.

[DeathQuaker]

For the purposes of the poll, #3. Homebrew 3.5/Pathfinder is largely what I'm active playing right now.

I feel the need to note that for the record, I don't feel any need to be mutually exclusive. I'm happy playing un-/minorly homebrewed 3.5 if I have the opportunity. I run 3.5/will switch to Pathfinder because that's what suits my GMing style best, but the other games have their merits. I don't feel like running it, but I'd play 4E if offered the chance. Now w/ 2nd Ed, I never had a lot of fun playing it (or the fun I had seemed to be in spite of the system), so I don't seek it out, but if a GM I trusted wanted to run it, I'd probably still jump at it. I admit I'm unlikely to play BD&D (who knows what happened to my copy) or 1st Ed but that's 'cause I don't have access to those and no one I know IRL plays them.

And WotC or anyone claiming their latest and greatest is the one and only--or their oldest and best is--can pry all of my editions of my gaming books out of my cold, dead hands. After which, my undead corpse will rise and devour them.

[Shazzbaa]

#2 was straight 3.5, right? I've pretty much only played 3.5.

Though I want to try 4e, but I need to find someone who wants to run it while I'm actually in town. ^^;

[Quirinus_Obsidian]

Loving 3.5 / Pathfinder and sticking to it. That's good stuff there.

[Britter]

When I was actively playing in a weekly game, is was good ole' AD&D, usually with a Birthright flavor. Good times.

For the purposes of the poll, however, I would put myself currently in the 4e camp. It is not a perfect system, but it suits the cinematic, rules light style I like in my gaming a little better then 3.x did. On top of that, it has been, well, about a decade since I touched any AD&D, my old group is long scattered to the winds, and it is time to move on.

[Tadanori Oyama]

I've changed over to 4E completely at this point. I like the whole system better by and large.

[Teron]

#2, definitely. Pathfinder has some appeal, but not enough to try and convert Eberron. Aside from running actual Pathfinder adventures (and honestly, I mostly subscribe for the monsters and raw inspiration), I think I'd rather stick with some light, flexible houseruling.

[Gryndle]

1) 4E. Over the last 25 years I've played every edition of DnD/AD&D. I think 4E is my favorite thus far.

[Dentarthur]

Put me down for 4e. I am playing one 4e campaign and running a second, and I'm enjoying the heck out of them both. I have no doubt that DMing would be much more complicated if we were using a previous edition, so for that I'm happy.

That said...

3.5 was my first taste of D&D (or of tabletop gaming in general), and as such I naturally have a soft spot for it. My very first character, an illusion-happy Sorcerer, survived a huge campaign all the way to 20th level. I'm definitely going to get the urge to play 3.5 every now and then as time goes on.

[Areswargod139]

Put the master of war for #3. (Just call me "snake"....I mean "Ares") I take a few Enworld modifications, a few of my own, and a few splatbooks here and there to try and balance out the game while still keeping it's customization and fun.:smallcool:

[Tengu_temp]

#1 - 4e. The first DND I'm actually playing.

[Jack Zander]

Wow, either the 4e gamers haven't spoken up yet, or these boards are still mostly 3e players.

[Isomenes]

I play both 4E and 3R, but I prefer 4E's mechanics, because it affords the largest range of playstyles with the least complexity. So, if it must be only one edition, I'd pick 4E (#1). But I do play both without reservation, with the occasional house rules that settings engender.

[Beleriphon]

Numero Uno please.

[Xenogears]

I play 3ed. Partly because I inherited the books from my brother, partly because thats what my friends play, and a large part because I can't afford any new books. I also play a few other table top RPG's like SWD20, Warhammer RPG (version 2? I think), and tried making a character with a Savage Worlds handbook.

[Roog]

At the moment I am GMing a D&D (for a change) game. I'm at (2) and trying hard to keep the ammount of house rules low enough to stay out of (3).

[erikun]

Yes. Wait, what?

Right now, I'm playing one game of 4e and one game of 3.5e. The difference in systems doesn't really matter much. I guess the correct answer would be "whatever my friends were playing at the time."

If I was to DM, I'd be looking at a (heavily) modified variant of 4e, mainly because that has a much cleaner system. Then again, I'd also be looking at trying a game in d20, or WoD, if nobody cared what we ran. However, I'm not seeing a "4e + modify" option either, so I guess I don't fit into your poll. :smalltongue:

[Oslecamo]

Option (2) for me. A minor tweak here and there and the system works wonderfully. On the other hand, I'm lucky enough to normally roleplay with people who aren't trying to destroy the campaign and the party.

I play a bit of 4e, but it's more for relaxing than anything.

Heck, actually I also still play some 3.0.

Like so many others said, while there are people willing to play 3.5, it will be my big favorite.

[acirruscloud]

#1

4E is just more fun, plain and simple. It gives you plenty of options, and then gets out of the way and lets you spend your time playing the damn game.

[LibraryOgre]

I currently play in 4th edition, but given my druthers, I'll be a #5... primarily AD&D, with some options added from 2nd edition, and some of 1st's simplicity.

4th is OK, but it's D&DINO; it has oversimplified things, and removed a lot of the distinction between classes, reducing it more to flavor.

[ken-do-nim]

I'm truly split between BD&D and AD&D 1E and I'm actively playing both, but if I have to say only one then it's ... AD&D 1E. Nagora & I stand alone on that one so far.

[Matthew]

Interesting figures so far; the sample is very close to my estimate based on total forum registrations at EnWorld and Dragonsfoot.

{table=head]| OoP | 3e | 4e
# | 17 | 40 | 7
% | 26.5 | 62.5 | 11
[/table]

[Jack Zander]

Interesting figures so far; the sample is very close to my estimate based on total forum registrations at EnWorld and Dragonsfoot.

{table=head]| OoP | 3e | 4e
# | 17 | 40 | 7
% | 26.5 | 62.5 | 11
[/table]

So these forums all have mostly 3rd edition players. Of course, the Wizards forums have mostly all 4th edition players. I'm wondering what the overall percentage is, and if 4th edition is doing as well as Wizards claims it is.

[Matthew]

So these forums all have mostly 3rd edition players. Of course, the Wizards forums have mostly all 4th edition players. I'm wondering what the overall percentage is, and if 4th edition is doing as well as Wizards claims it is.

I think 26.5% is actually a good chunk at this point, especially when you consider that it's only likely to grow and many of the people in the other categories have played 4e or bought 4e books, but I digress...

We probably ought not to analyse the data until all the results are in. :smallbiggrin:

[Jack Zander]

Well, I'd say now is the time to buy some stock in Paizo, if those figures are a correct representation of the whole.

[Wolfpack]

Well, I'd say now is the time to buy some stock in Paizo, if those figures are a correct representation of the whole.

Most of the people who are still playing 3.5 want nothing to do with Paizo, so I wouldn't if I were you.

[Thurbane]

2) 3.5E. You like the previous, more complex edition and intend on continuing to play it with only minor alterations if any.
Three-point-fiver for life, yo! :smallbiggrin:

My group is very happy with 3.5, and (depending who's DMing) we use very little houserules.

I cut my teeth on BD&D and AD&D 1E, then moved on to 2E. When I first went over to 3.5 (skipped 3E altogether due to a long break in our group), I was very dubious, but it grew on my really quickly.

I just don't get that feeling from 4E. From the 2 short sessions I played, it really isn't to my tastes. There's also the financial incentive, since I (we) own almost the entire 3.5 catalog, and have only gotten to use a fraction of it so far.

I may go over to 4.5 or 5E, but for the forseeable future, 3.5 (with possible smatterings of Pathfinder) is my weapon of choice.

[Kroy]

option 2, basic 3.5

[Vortling]

Given the options I'd have to say I fit mostly in #2. I do play 4e some but it's not my main game by a long shot. I don't houserule 3.5 enough to put me in the 3 category.

[Kaihaku]

I've played Second Edition and Third Edition.

I still play d20 Modern/Future and 3.5. In the future, I'll probably play 4e for the only style of play it supports well (everyone's different in the same way) and for other styles of play I'll use Pathfinder ("3.6").

[Skyserpent]

4e for me. Though I still dabble in 3.5

[Knaight]

Whichever is available, although all editions of D&D rank way below most other games. Above crap like Synibar, and FATAL, but still low enough that I probably shouldn't be used as an example of people willing to buy say pathfinder or lots of fourth edition stuff.

[Gralamin]

I'll play whatever has an interesting game, though I prefer 4E. Currently, I'm in a 3.5 game and three 4E games. Its not like you have to pick one and go with it. 4E is D&D but different, just as 3.X is D&D but different, and 2E is AD&D but different... (etc.).

The poll in its entirety is flawed because it assumes that players will tend to choose one and go with it, when that is rarely true. Since your working from flawed premises, the accuracy of the statistics you gather are in question.

Regardless, put me down for 1) I guess.

[Matthew]

The poll in its entirety is flawed because it assumes that players will tend to choose one and go with it, when that is rarely true. Since your working from flawed premises, the accuracy of the statistics you gather are in question.

It's just a bit of fun, not market research. It might be worth creating a "no strong preference" option, though. :smallwink:

[Kizara]

It's just a bit of fun, not market research. It might be worth creating a "no strong preference" option, though. :smallwink:

By forcing people to make a choice I can actually gather some useful information.

If I had a "whatever is availible" or "a mixture of many" option a HUGE amount of people would choose it (judging by the posts in this thread) and I would gain almost no useful information at all.

[Charity]

It's just a bit of fun, not market research. It might be worth creating a "no strong preference" option, though. :smallwink:

Only if you want that one to be the winner, I think ultimately we know we are mostly easy (particularly in my case) but it is interesting and informative what people choose if they are forced to make that choice, however unrealistic it is to have it forced upon them.

[Matthew]

By forcing people to make a choice I can actually gather some useful information.

If I had a "whatever is availible" or "a mixture of many" option a HUGE amount of people would choose it (judging by the posts in this thread) and I would gain almost no useful information at all.

You could read it that way, or it could mean that a lot of people could have gone either way, and may poll differently today than they did yesterday. Also, a lot of folk may simply not make their voice heard without that option. So far there are about seventy votes in showing a 30/60/10 split, but I would usually expect a stronger showing at GitP.



Only if you want that one to be the winner, I think ultimately we know we are mostly easy (particularly in my case) but it is interesting and informative what people choose if they are forced to make that choice, however unrealistic it is to have it forced upon them.

It is interesting and informative alright.

[Aenghus]

Option 1 for me.

I've played Basic, Expert, 1e, 2e, 3.0 and 3.5 D&D, and ran a almost 7 year campaign in 3.0, moving to 3.5, which ended this year just in time for 4e.

I got tired of the workload that 3.x imposed especially at high levels. The brokeness of full caster classes was indicated by the long-term players in the campaign all gravitating to said classes.

And 4e is a new shiny toolbox to be tried out. So far I do find it to be less work preparing for, a major plus, though we are all still getting up to speed to the powers and conditions system. It's not perfect, but so far so good.

[Tehnar]

Option 3) for me I think.

Until a year ago played unmodified 3.5. When I started my own campaign a year ago play houseruled 3.5.

[acirruscloud]

I'm wondering what the overall percentage is, and if 4th edition is doing as well as Wizards claims it is.

In this age of illegally downloaded PDFs, I'm not sure that its commercial success gives an entirely accurate picture of its popularity. For example, there are 8 people in my 4E campaign, and none of us own a physical copy of any of the 4E books.

I'm not going to say we obtained our PDFs in an illicit manner. But I will say that we're all broke college students.

It's just a fact of the times that intellectual property isn't going to sell as well as it might have a decade ago.

[DigoDragon]

Group 2. Been playing that edition since... 2004 I believe.

[Jack Zander]

In this age of illegally downloaded PDFs, I'm not sure that its commercial success gives an entirely accurate picture of its popularity. For example, there are 8 people in my 4E campaign, and none of us own a physical copy of any of the 4E books.

I'm not going to say we obtained our PDFs in an illicit manner. But I will say that we're all broke college students.

It's just a fact of the times that intellectual property isn't going to sell as well as it might have a decade ago.

Ah yes, the repercussions of not having an SRD this time around. Popularity isn't actually what I'm interested in. I'm more interested in the actual success of the company. I'm seeing a pattern here, similar to what happened to TSR.

[Erk]

Option 1, 4e when we play D&D (which is currently). The campaign is great fun, and it's revitalised my interest in D&D for a while.

Otherwise, Option 48: BESM or TriStat DX. Our games are generally freeform, so these systems are usually the best choice.

[DMfromTheAbyss]

1, 3, 5.

I'm in a 4rth ed game that's going well, when we can manage to get togeather.

I'm also in a 3.5 game with some home-brew-rules that looks really promising.

I also run a 2nd ed modified homebrew I find to work better than anything else for my GMing, though it's got a bit of 1st 3rd and 4rth in it now, but it's "closest" to 2nd ed.

[TwoBitWriter]

4E. I have played all the edition, and I feel that each one brought something very worthwhile to the table, but I enjoy 4E enough to be exclusive.

Especially with the Adventurer's Vault, all the stuf that SHOULD have been in the PHB to begin with...

[nowiwantmydmg]

4E. Its great without extra unneccesary mechanics bogging things down and the DM load for me and the other DM is much less than in previous editions. Not having to be good at system mastery is nice for our newer players too. We prefer high roleplay games and haven't noticed a difference in that regard (I don't know why it would make a difference, roleplay is imagination not system).

Of 1e, 2e, 3e and 4e, 4e is by far our group's favorite.


Do keep in mind this poll will be heavily skewed towards 3.5 as this is the board for a 3.5e comic. The same as the wizards boards are skewed toward 4e. I don't really care how the poll turns out, but it won't be valid for any research purposes.

In any event regardless of what game system you prefer, happy gaming.

[DM Raven]

I play a homebrew version of 4.0 mostly because melee combat and characters are far superior to the previous version. And while there are things I liked better about 3.5, I think 4.0 is a superior system overall.

Been playing since 1st edition, and I find that a good story can be told regardless of rule-system. That being said, I'd rather use a rule-system that's more fun to play regardless of the class you choose.

[DM Raven]

In this age of illegally downloaded PDFs, I'm not sure that its commercial success gives an entirely accurate picture of its popularity. For example, there are 8 people in my 4E campaign, and none of us own a physical copy of any of the 4E books.

I'm not going to say we obtained our PDFs in an illicit manner. But I will say that we're all broke college students.

It's just a fact of the times that intellectual property isn't going to sell as well as it might have a decade ago.

If you're in college, you're obvious not as broke as you claim. It's not that you can't afford the books, it's just much easier for you to steal them then some of your other hobby supplies I would assume.

Sorry for the de-railing...

[acirruscloud]

If you're in college, you're obvious not as broke as you claim. It's not that you can't afford the books, it's just much easier for you to steal them then some of your other hobby supplies I would assume.

Sorry for the de-railing...

I'm not sure where to begin addressing your misconceptions. Being in college means having disposable income? What? And then you tell me whether or not I can afford something?

Listen, guy. I take seven classes at a top (overpriced) university and work an unpaid internship in the music industry (yes, that music industry, I'm sure you see the parallels). That leaves me no more than six hours a week to work my second job, at which I get paid just over minimum wage. Now, unless you want to tell me how to go without eating or paying rent, why don't you take your "analysis" of my finances and shove it up your ass?

Apologies to 99% of people reading this, who didn't just presume to tell me what I can afford. I really am sorry, but I can't sit there and let the "college students are cheap and amoral" attitude slide.

[Matthew]

Apologies to 99% of people reading this, who didn't just presume to tell me what I can afford. I really am sorry, but I can't sit there and let the "college students are cheap and amoral" attitude slide.

I can sympathise, but this is supposed to be a friendly forum. We are generally expected to report personal attacks and other questionable conduct to the moderators, rather than reply in kind.

[acirruscloud]

You're right. I'm sorry. Having a stressful semester, and playing D&D every Sunday night is my release. Forgive my outburst.:smallredface:

[nagora]

Listen, guy. I take seven classes at a top (overpriced) university and work an unpaid internship in the music industry (yes, that music industry, I'm sure you see the parallels). That leaves me no more than six hours a week to work my second job, at which I get paid just over minimum wage.
I seem to have missed the bit where someone forced you to do all that :smallconfused:


Ah yes, the repercussions of not having an SRD this time around. Popularity isn't actually what I'm interested in. I'm more interested in the actual success of the company. I'm seeing a pattern here, similar to what happened to TSR.
Can you expand? Which of the many things that happened to TSR are you thinking of, and what pattern?

[Kizara]

I seem to have missed the bit where someone forced you to do all that :smallconfused:


Can you expand? Which of the many things that happened to TSR are you thinking of, and what pattern?

IT_DOESNT_MATTER.

Stop derailing my thread.

Its a poll regarding what version of DnD you play, you aren't even discussing that.

Not to mention I asked discussion to be kept to a minimum regardless.


This goes double for "acirruscloud" and "DM Raven", who started this mess.

[only1doug]

we play 3.5 in the forgotten realms setting with following optional rules / houserules:
Wound Points and Vitality Points
Spell Points
No Teleportations*


*Dimension door and all similar spells upto and including teleportation circle don't work unless your starting point is a Portal stone.

Portal stones are not portable, once setup they are difficult to dismantle.

Portal stones can be made by permanently enchanting a oblisk or other object of appropriate arcane shape with teleportation circle. This process is neither cheap nor fast.