Ztalker Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 Strange. I usually play tank/dps....thought I'd be more leaning to a palladin or warrior like type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingerhs Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 *Hugs AD&D 2e Books* Bah! 4e what is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hallucination Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 I'm still not buying the 4e books, despite your clear plug of PHB2, dear DI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSR Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 Score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wedge Suron Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 I'm a rogue, however I can't get the link to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan7 Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 I'll be praying for you all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderWiggin Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 ^Wow, not surprised _EW_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pho3nix Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 Ranger. I'm not surprised Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabretooth Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 These results make for mystifying alliances: Avengers: Darathy, Jae Barbarians: Padawan, Militiades Warlords: ForeverNight, igyman, TSR Swordmages: TriggerGod, Trex Wizards: Qliveur, Sabre, Devon, Moeller Rangers: Maverick, Pho3nix Rogues: Avery, Astro, Ztalker, Scorpius, Canderis Paladins: Thanatos, Stinger, Bob, Schmorgy Sorcerors: Ender, Watson Bards: Adamqd Clerics: Jon, Sam Shaman: Pavlos SHOCKING Inferences: 1. Darathy and Jae are actually similar in some respect. 2. Devon, I and Moeller are actually similar in some respect despite encompassing the entire spectrum of sanity levels. 3. Pho3nix and Maverick are similar, but they actually are, and they're unique at that. 4. Avery, Astro and Ztalker are conniving thieves upto no good. 5. Two of my favourite people on the forum (Watson and Ender) share a class and are unique. 6. Two of the smartest, nicest and coolest members are both Clerics. 7. Pavlos is, as I have always seen him, strange, occult and intriguingly unique. /ass-kissing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSR Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 Sabre I am so not inviting you to the mothership now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 Sabre I am so not inviting you to the mothership now. Well if that's the case... I have a Shadow Cruiser all set up for you Sabre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoffe Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 Kind of ironic since Bard tend to be the class I like the least when playing D&D games and haven't really made any enduring bard characters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForeverNight Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 Well, at least with what I remember from 2e -God, I really need to get another game going- Bards were only good in 2 circumstances, as a supporting character for a fighting pary, or in a single character adventure. In two or three character adventures they tended to do very little, thanks to low HP... Don't know if they 'fixed' that in 4e... makes me wish I hadn't spent the 40USD on the 4e Player's Handbook! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyvios Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 I have to admit, I was little surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue15 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 I got Ranger. not too surprised Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bee Hoon Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 Heh I've done this before. Obvious answers are obvious and need a little more moderation I got wizard too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Betrayer Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alkonium Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arátoeldar Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 *Hugs AD&D 2e Books* Bah! 4e what is that? Mucho Agreeance. Here I thought that the 3.0 & 3.5 rule sets were bad. They have nothing on the 4.0 edition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 Mucho Agreeance. Here I thought that the 3.0 & 3.5 rule sets were bad. They have nothing on the 4.0 edition. Having paroused the 4e Books I think it is trying to turn D&D into World of Warcraft... I strongly dislike this. Of course the clue-less Button-Mashing-Console-Kiddies™ will likely not see anything wrong with it I bet, as it likely is right up their proverbial alley's. Hell 4e it makes 3.5 look 'uber'... just typing that out makes me want to go wash my hands with soap! What was the topic again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serpentine Cougar Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Didn't see this coming from the questions... (/sarcasm) Could anyone explain what exactly is wrong with 4e and 3/3.5, and why 2e is so much better? I'm curious and have never played DnD. (*shock*) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Dravis Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 IIRC 3.X thrashed overpowered dual weapon wielding and therefore the Aragorn/Legolas fanboys can't play like they want anymore. Also they switched to the d20 system and leveling was made easier, which of course the hardcore players would hate with a passion. Don't hurt me please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucied Posted March 29, 2009 Share Posted March 29, 2009 Ranger Nice my favorite class Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 IIRC 3.X thrashed overpowered dual weapon wielding and therefore the Aragorn/Legolas fanboys can't play like they want anymore. It may surprise you but I never liked LOTR... so I never wanted any of it. But in 2e Dual Wielding required a significant investment and wasn't as 'uber' as it is in say 3.5. But I guess it is all up to the individual house rules added as well, that changes things. FYI, I based most of my early characters off of Samurai Movies, Arthurian Legend, even some Dickens characters, as well as Dumas Three Musketeers characters. Also they switched to the d20 system and leveling was made easier, which of course the hardcore players would hate with a passion. I hate D20 but not for the reasons you seem to think... It is easy to teach the young-ins to play though, so it opens doors as their capabilities increase it allows the weening of the D20 system and expose them to the many other better game systems... so D20 does have merits there as a good beginner game because of its limiting nature, then again Star Wars D6 is also very beginner friendly and isn't limited in any way character-wise. Don't hurt me please! No need... you said nothing worthy of physical pain. FWIW I never was a big fan of any D&D system, though 2ed of AD&D got the most things right in it and was playable though some things remained convoluted for the uninitiated. 2e will always be D&D to me, as it is the most unlimited of the D&D titles/materials out there. Personally I'm a Chaosium and Palladium system fan as they have the free-est Pnp RPG systems I have seen... and of course the D6 WEG Star Wars RPG. I have played almost all the systems out there (even some obscure ones you might have never heard of...), ones like Alma Mater (A High School RPG), Creeks and Crawdads (Don't eat the thinker!), and many others. Could anyone explain what exactly is wrong with 4e and 3/3.5, and why 2e is so much better? I'm curious and have never played DnD. (*shock*) I'll try to put as simple as I can; Characters I have in AD&D 2e... I can't have in 3.X and certainly never will be able to replicate in 4e... this means a game is limiting (too limiting) if an acceptable character is able to be made in one system, and played, but cannot be fully replicated or converted in the other (In the same fantasy settings/genre even). The same complaint can be made when Wizards of the Coast bought West End Games, the so-called Star Wars D20 system and they even provided so-called conversion charts in the books to convert the D6 system to D20 and it was a riot how our characters turned out afterward... we as a gaming group scoffed and shelved the D20 books... it limited us and our options that is bad for an RPG. But this is off-topic enough I think... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2.thumb.jpg.a78941b263d8162989c1c433ce7cacee.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.