test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
A 4e video game! Finally!
arontimes
Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild Users Posts: 0 Arc User
Hello, I am Aron Times, and I'm excited to finally be able to play a D&D 4e video game after about five years of waiting. My favorite class is the sorcerer, specifically, the dragon sorcerer, and Aron Times is the name I use for my sorcerer characters in 3e and in 4e. I'll be saving it for when the dragon sorcerer is released. For now, methinks I will roll a drow guardian fighter or a dwarf rogue. I generally prefer to use unusual race/class combinations.
Post edited by arontimes on
0
Comments
I recommend reading the New User FAQ if you havent already.
The Directory of the Founder Guilds of Neverwinter can help with guild shopping.
Also I invite you to have a look at my guild,if you like it feel free to join.(I leave a link in my signature)
Hope to see you round the forums and in-game
Anyone still searching for guilds you can check out HCG Hardcore Christian Gamers.
NW FAQ | HCG NW Host Site
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Absolutely agree with this. 4e broke D&D, which is why they immediately started work on D&D Next (5e) to try to bring the splintered community back together. The best thing that ever happened to Pathfinder, was the publishing of 4e. A product has to be pretty bad when you put out the next edition, and more people flock to another company's game based on your last edition than switch to your newest edition.
No, that would be 3.5.
+1,000,000
http://www.loremaster.org
I've played D&D regularly since 1981, with 1st edition.
3.0 and 3.5 are easily the worst editions made. 4th is definitely more fun, and though it is the most different from the other 3 editions, it definitely has it's good points and bad. It requires far more tactics than any of the other editions, and I think that's a good thing, personally.
Pathfinder is basically 3.5 that doesn't suck quite as bad. Still not my cup of tea, but definitely better than 3.5.
But honestly, ANY edition is only as good as the DM running it.
Sadly, while Neverwinter is 'based' on 4th edition - it really is nothing like the tabletop game. I think it's funny seeing haters of 4th running their mouths in Local chat - it's like arguing which is better - an apple, or a pizza. They're both food, but really nothing alike.
this....agree 100%. At least my group played it longer than we played Diablo 3.
3.0/3.5 were, IMHO, excellent editions. They had problems that needed fixing, but they were better as "D&D" games than 4e, which appeals to the video game / table top wargaming crowd (such as warmachine, warhammer etc). 4e has horrible exploits as well, which my power gaming friends were all too eager to delve into.
Some classes were OP, while several were UP. Multi-class became a joke. Classes became a straight jacket, molding a cohesive character in your mind had to take a back seat to building a specialized death machine. To do anything less than that meant your party would fail, or you wouldn't be able to contribute anywhere near as much as the rest of your party members. Even DMing choices couldn't mitigate this beyond a minor amount, unless they chose to run a RP/skill check only adventure.
They took the best elements of D20 Modern, screwed them up, and called it 4e - quite sad.
It did add some interesting tactical elements, but it took the magic out of D&D (literally and figuratively, IMHO). RPing dropped off, replaced by die rolls/skill tests. Yes, 3.5 had that to an extent... but it didn't feel as mechanical (and it was opposed, as well as on the fly buffs/debuffs to the rolls for RPing). 2e had more rp and magical feeling than 3e, which had more than 4e... never having played 1e, I can't comment (but I do own several books, wow...quite complicated) on it.
My first introduction to DnD was with Baldurs Gate 2. It got me interested and i started reading the rulebooks online. My opinion, already then, was that the rules where uneccessary complicated sometimes. Anyway, never got to play it, but bought myself my first rulebook when DnD 3E came out.
DnD 3E was my kind of game. Simple (roll a d20 for most of your actions), easy to mix elements from different rulebooks, easy to multiclass and get a unique character. That the ruleset was easily exploitable was a good thing, not a bad thing (balance is boring). Then a whole slew of D20 books started appearing, everyone with their own ideas on how to improve upon the 3.0 ruleset. And many of them was good.
When 4Ed was announced, and i saw how different it was, i was disappointed that they would throw away a perfectly good ruleset and a lot of content, just for the sake of change. And the rules was video-gamified, and balanced and many abilities made no sense in a fluff point of view. But i still bought the books, and started a game with my friends. Despite they voicing the same concerns as me, this was the game they had the most fun with. Tactical and balanced. I did not like to DM for it, so i finally got a friend with better multi-tasking than me, to try to DM. And all was good.. Except he found no enjoyment from adventure/world/plot-building, the other half of DMing (my favorite part), and we soon stopped playing.
Anyway, conclusion; every ruleset has its strengths and weaknesses, and cater to different playstyles.
I really enjoy 4e, but I also enjoy older D&D versions. Each edition is fine in its own way. I've had fun with each one. I just don't understand how ignorant people are.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRZ1CYYIsCg
Respect the DB!
Neverwinter Roleplayers
is a cool community site.