PDA

View Full Version : New players- 3.5 or 4e?



Elfin
2009-07-16, 07:08 PM
Quite soon, I'm going to be introducing a group of kids (around age 12) to D&D, and I'm wondering what would be easier to run for new players- 3.5 or 4e?
Mostly in the sense of the learning curve, but really any reasons are fine.

Mando Knight
2009-07-16, 07:11 PM
Probably 4E. It's pretty straightforward, and you can teach the same rules to the kids once and they'll know how to play the fighter or the wizard...

Quietus
2009-07-16, 07:12 PM
Character creation in 4e involves a lot more choices than some 3.5 classes (easier than Fighters/Barbarians/any noncaster in general, though 3.5 casters require MORE choices), but from what I know of it, the 4e system is much more simple.

If you're building the characters for them (which I'd recommend; Get an idea of what they want to play, then build that character for them), then 4e is probably easier overall.

Elfin
2009-07-16, 07:14 PM
Yea, I'll be creating their characters for them.
And thanks for the advice.

Berserk Monk
2009-07-16, 07:44 PM
Go 3.5. It's better and it'll just confuse them if you use 4 and they want to try the glory that is 3.5.

I started playing 3.5 when I was 12 and I understood it fine.

Elfin
2009-07-16, 07:49 PM
Well, I definitely prefer 3.5 to 4th, I was just worried about complexity. I guess at the beginning all that has to be done is
"I cast Magic Missile on the goblin."
"I attack the goblin with my greatsword."
"I sneak attack the goblin."

Yea, I think I'll do good ol' 3.5.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-07-16, 07:52 PM
Which edition can you DM more smoothly?

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-07-16, 07:57 PM
Well, I definitely prefer 3.5 to 4th, I was just worried about complexity.

The difficulty inherent in the 1e through 3e learning curve is highly overrated. I picked up the famously confusing and archaic 1e at age 8 and I did fine; it's all personal ability, not the edition.

Mr.Moron
2009-07-16, 08:10 PM
Keep in mind should they decide to branch out and start their own groups/buy their own material in the future, it'll likely be 4e. Just due to availability. In the long run getting them started with the current material earlier might be healthier for the enjoyment of the hobby.

AslanCross
2009-07-16, 08:19 PM
My players started around age 12-15 with 3.5. They didn't really have issues with character choices since I was around to guide them.

Pharaoh's Fist also brings up a good point. Your preference is also important in the matter, since if someone in the group is not enjoying because of the ruleset, something is wrong.

Ridureyu
2009-07-16, 08:19 PM
They both have a lot of good points in their own way.

Elfin
2009-07-16, 11:28 PM
Yea... I could definitely DM 3.5 more easily, so I think I'll run that.
Now I better get started on the prep work, as the session's on Sunday.
Thanks everyone for the help. :smalltongue:

Kurald Galain
2009-07-17, 03:29 AM
Quite soon, I'm going to be introducing a group of kids (around age 12) to D&D, and I'm wondering what would be easier to run for new players- 3.5 or 4e?
Depending on what you want... are you dead set on playing D&D? Because it is one of the most complex and rules-heavy systems out there, regardless of edition, so personally for any kind of beginners I would recommend something much more rules-light.

That said, are your players more into freeform make-believe, or more into boardgaming?

Kurald Galain
2009-07-17, 03:31 AM
Keep in mind should they decide to branch out and start their own groups/buy their own material in the future, it'll likely be 4e. Just due to availability.

One word: Pathfinder.

skywalker
2009-07-17, 03:40 AM
If the characters are pre-built, 4e.

If they're not pre-built, and you try to create characters and teach at the same time... There'll be hell to pay.

The problem with 4e is that "the girlfriend" (which is a gaming trope, IMO) can't hide anymore. Before, there was always the fighter. You make the character, teach the person how to roll attack rolls with PA, and everything is fine. Now in 4e, the fighter is one of the hardest classes to make choices for and play.

Anyway, back to my original point, 3.5 is so much easier to teach as part of character creation, IMO. I'm not sure why, I'll have to think about it for a more concrete reason.

One problem with teaching 3.5 players 4e (which I know you didn't ask about) is that it's similar enough to make you think everything is ok, but different enough to confuse the hell out of you at certain times.

Just my observations from teaching both systems to a variety of players.

misterk
2009-07-17, 03:51 AM
If I recall correctly, 4e comes with suggested character builds for each class, which the players could go for if they don't want to choose. Having come to 3.5 fresh from last playing 2nd edition I found character generation fairly long winded, especially where to sensibly send the skill points one had. 4E is a fairly elegant system which I expect players who were introduced to both would be far more inclined towards.

Person_Man
2009-07-17, 09:28 AM
Age 12 is when I started playing 1st ed, and let me tell you, it was difficult. Perhaps you should start them off with Mage Knight (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mage_Knight), and just roleplay everything else without rules. Then shift them into 4E or Star Wars Saga Edition when they're 14ish.

I love 3.5 and prefer it over 4E, but the level of rules mastery that it requires is not child friendly.

Kaiyanwang
2009-07-17, 10:03 AM
IMHO, one thing is the kids have to play the game alone, one thing is they are guided.

If someone oversee them, even a difficult system is ok - simply, they will catch is step by step.

And I think it's not a good thing undestimate the intelligence of kids. I guess that even left alone, most kids could learn the system, probably by mistakes, voluntary and involuntary houserules, but having fun, like I did with my friends

*coughs and cover himself with the plaid*

Tiki Snakes
2009-07-17, 10:23 AM
Which the DM prefers is worth baring in mind, but it COULD be an idea to describe the two systems, in general and neutral terms, to the kids in question and see if they have any preferences.

Sure, many kids will just look at you and have no real opinion. Others will have a strong opinion on pretty much anything you ask them. Given that 4th and 3rd do to some degree favour different styles of play and different types of character, it could be worth seeing what they think?

Oslecamo
2009-07-17, 11:10 AM
One word: Pathfinder.

Wait you're joking right? Sure I have great hopes of 3.X outliving 4e, but pathfinder isn't one of them, unless they do some drastic changes to their "fixes", in wich case it would be pathfinder 2.0 or something.

dragoonsgone
2009-07-18, 07:35 PM
Theres a 20 dollar box that is like a basic 4e, comes with dice and quickstart rules and quickstart DM guide and premade characters and what to do with when you level them. It also has a short campaign with 3 encounters but could segway into another very easily.

I strongly recommend this.

mistformsquirrl
2009-07-18, 07:38 PM
Hrmm...

This is a tough one.

Objectively, both systems have enough quirks that I'd have to say either is going to have areas with a lot of "Huh?!" room.

I say go with whatever system you can DM more smoothly. That way when questions pop up (and they will, regardless of which edition you use), you'll be able to answer more easily.

Elfin
2009-07-18, 08:02 PM
Thanks everyone for the help.

The game's tomorrow, and I've cooked up a nice, old-style 3.5 ruin filled with some goblins and other beasties, a small town, and a patch of wilderness in between. Not sure how it'll go, but I'm looking forward to it nonetheless.

dragoonsgone
2009-07-18, 10:53 PM
Thanks everyone for the help.

The game's tomorrow, and I've cooked up a nice, old-style 3.5 ruin filled with some goblins and other beasties, a small town, and a patch of wilderness in between. Not sure how it'll go, but I'm looking forward to it nonetheless.

Have fun and let us know how it goes.

Knaight
2009-07-18, 11:35 PM
I was going to suggest you start with something else, just so the people know that there is more to the RPG genre than D&D, but too late now. Tell us how it goes.

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-07-18, 11:44 PM
I was going to suggest you start with something else, just so the people know that there is more to the RPG genre than D&D, but too late now. Tell us how it goes.

Well, there may be more to RPGs than D&D, but I'd say it's best for younger kids--I'd enjoy a dungeon crawl with my 9-year-old cousin much more than, say, a game of Vampire or Mage or whatever, and D&D's "Here, you're a level 1 wizard, pick 2 spells" is a lot easier to teach them than GURPS's "Here, have X character points, go wild."

Vaynor
2009-07-18, 11:51 PM
I started playing 3.5 when I was 11, and I never had a problem with it. Great system.

Elfin
2009-07-19, 12:19 AM
Well, there may be more to RPGs than D&D, but I'd say it's best for younger kids--I'd enjoy a dungeon crawl with my 9-year-old cousin much more than, say, a game of Vampire or Mage or whatever, and D&D's "Here, you're a level 1 wizard, pick 2 spells" is a lot easier to teach them than GURPS's "Here, have X character points, go wild."

Yea, GURPS with 12-year olds...sounds like fun.
I can't even understand GURPS
And doesn't the name strike you as just a little bit laughable?

Zeta Kai
2009-07-19, 12:27 AM
One word: Pathfinder.

Three words: Amazon Dot Com. They have all the D&D books you could ever want, & 3E books are dirt cheap now. There's never been a better time to buy 3E stuff. 4E can't compete with a market that's saturated with previously printed material. This fills me with sweet, delicious Schadenfreude. :smallbiggrin:

Kroy
2009-07-19, 01:13 AM
I never understood the whole "12-year olds are morons" vibe the internet has. I played 3.5 when I was 12. I could make my own characters without a problem at age 10, even moderately optimized. I don't see why people think 12-year olds are to stupid to choose spells/feats, races/classes, ability scores/weapons, etc..

I mean, if your doing pre-algrebra, why can't you crunch a few simple numbers?

Edit: Didn't notice you there, Vaynor. Pretty much what I was saying.

Kurald Galain
2009-07-19, 03:18 AM
Well, there may be more to RPGs than D&D, but I'd say it's best for younger kids
Compared to GURPS, yes, D&D is going to be easier. Compared to, you know, rules-light RPGs like OTE, no it's not. D&D is one of the slowest systems in terms of character building, regardless of whether that's 3E or 4E.


Wait you're joking right? Sure I have great hopes of 3.X outliving 4e, but pathfinder isn't one of them,
I'm not saying I agree with the direction Pathfinder is going; however I am saying that commercial support for 3E-compatible games is going to exist for quite awhile.

Knaight
2009-07-19, 04:09 AM
Or say Savage Worlds. Its not just D&D, Whitewolf, and GURPS, if I have to extend this. There are a lot of games, and starting off on an obscure one tells the players 2 things.
1) There are games other than the ones you always hear about.
2) Some of these are good games.
3) There is a huge diversity of mechanics in these games.

Burning Wheel also comes to mind as a possible game, its a complex game, but all the complexity is up front, and once you get used to it it plays pretty naturally. And as a backup game, if it turns out the new players aren't big on mechanics and would like rules light games, we have Wushu, Risus, Fudge. Although that last one is a toolkit, and I have seen some mechanically complex games made with it.

Then there are the light weight acronym games QAGS, YAGS, MERP, SLUG, OTE, TSOY, etc.

TSOY is god awful, however. If you bump into it read the Keys section, commit the basics to memory, and don't bother with the rest. Then add it to a good game. Spirit of the Century is pretty much directly compatible, and is a good light weight game, even for new players.

Elfin
2009-07-19, 12:49 PM
I'm not saying twelve year olds are stupid. In fact, I've met these kids and they're all pretty bright. I just want to introduce them to the world of roleplaying with something relatively simple.
And I'm off to the game now, I'll let you guys know how it goes.

Tyrmatt
2009-07-19, 01:09 PM
Depending on how the kids are inclined towards genres e.g. fantasy, superheroes etc, the systems will impact this and your ability to fit their genre tastes. If they like swords and sorcery, then it really is just a case of picking the (in my opinion) mired in tradition 3.5e, or the more flexible 4e.
I say 4th Edition mostly because it corrects some of the gulf between the casters and the melee-ers. It could prove the case that the kid who ends up as the party wizard has exactly the kind of smarts needed to be the Batman-Wizard who dominates everyone else and leaves the others feeling left out. Especially with children who pick melee classes that they assume will act like the TV and comic heroes by being utterly unkillable.

Or the case that the wizard kid can't comprehend the Be Prepared motto that follows the wizard everywhere and just wants to blast things. That's fine if you're DMing with a lot of leeway but it can potentially run the risk of say running a standard monster that any party on these boards would stomp through while kids who picked abilities and spells based on them being cool sounding have real frustrating difficulty when playing with a more traditionalist DM (or worse yet, another kid who's being doing it for years).

In terms of working as a team, I pick 4E. There's nothing like the feeling of getting a huge combo together using the sliding mechanics and the map-heavy system allows them to visualize the combat and spell effects more easily. They also get to have a nice personal miniature to become attached to and you can use the character creator to make the nice ability cards for them to keep track of what they can do in each encounter.
But if the kids are anything like I was when I was twelve, attempting to wade into the 2nd Edition stuff full throttle, they'll do fine with 3.5e.

Oh, unless they want to be superheroes. Then play GURPS. Because Unkillable only costs 50 points :p

jmbrown
2009-07-19, 01:30 PM
I'm surprised anyone could even consider 3.5 to be more simple than 4E. It took months worth of playing to fully understand the nuances of combat such as readied actions, delaying, memorizing all the special abilities like trip and grapple and stuff. The rules compendium is probably the best book ever released for 3.5 because all that crap is contained in one simple tome.

4E was written in a "for dummies" approach. I prefer 3.5 as a complete system, but it's impossible to be confused with 4E because everything important is located in those boxes with bullet points. No more reading long paragraphs to find relevant bonuses and "this is what you can do, this is what you can't do, here are special modifiers to what you can do..." 4E has everything important clearly labeled, bolded, italicized, and with bullet points. If something conflicts with another rule then the rule in the gray box supercedes it. Simple.

oxybe
2009-07-19, 02:33 PM
i'd say 4th ed.

i've been playing both 3rd and 4th since they each came out and i will say that 4th ed tends to be quicker to pickup and play then 3rd ed, IMO.

the main bonus is that all characters work off the same foundation. teach them how the @will, encounter & daily system works and it's good for all players. same with the keywords. all classes use the same ones to describe their effects, ranges, ect... so again, teach it once and it works for everyone.

the biggest hurdle is learning how to work properly as a team.

i do, however, place a lot of importance on DM's familiarity with the system to teach new players. if the DM is comfortable with a system it will make teaching the newbies a LOT easier. i remember me and my buddy trying to decipher 2nd ed at his kitchen table without any help oh so many years ago.

since it does seem that you're going with 3rd ed i would recommend using PHB only to start off with and give them a few pregens to look at and explain different aspects of the characters when finalized. having the pregens will help cut down setup time if some of players just want to play ASAP and learn as they go.

i would run a test dungeon to let them get used to using the skills & how combat works. it doesn't need to be a big dungeon even: goblins are hiding in the old house on the hill & farmer Brown is getting pissed because those buggers are stealing his cattle under cover of night. this task might be a test of worth by the local adventurer's guild or whatever. just something simple so they can learn the basics.

this lets the players do a bit of investigating with the locals: farmer brown & his family, the local police/guard/watch, maybe the crazy hermit who lives in the woods.

when they get to the hideout they'll meet with a few locked doors, maybe a crude trap or two, stuff to smash and a bunch of gobbos... make sure to give them some warnings (IE: you might want to try listening to a closed door instead of busting in like you did last time, so you don't warn the goblins inside) and hold their hand for the first half of the adventure, then throw them to the hungry goblins when they start thinking for themselves :smallbiggrin:

this could then lead to a bigger adventure should they continue playing (like what would force goblins to take up hiding in a old human house and steal cattle).

Mitth'raw'nuruo
2009-07-19, 02:51 PM
Honestly; I am sad I did not get here in time. I would have said Star Wars Saga Ed. (which is 4th ed.)

Great game, most kids know & like Star Wars, and it makes role playing easier IMO.

And I think most people underestamate younger kids because we are old. AS we got older, we got dumb, and but we think we are just as smart as we used to be....

Lupy
2009-07-19, 03:27 PM
My friend, brother, and I started playing Star Wars SAGA with absolutely no clue of what we were doing at the ages of 12 (my friend and I) and 10 (my brother) with minimal problems. We butchered a lot of rules outside of combat and basic rolls, but we had a lot of fun, and I made up the whole (and fairly good, even if I say so myself) campaign off the top of my head as we went along. 2 years after it ended we still talk about the characters and NPCs.

The system is really simple, combat wise, and it's easy to get new gear, which is what my players were really into. It is a great system for beginning, and even afterwords.

Elfin
2009-07-19, 06:51 PM
Well, I'm back.
It went great, the kids are fun and picked up on the game pretty quick. The five of them and I sat down at the table, and I spent the first half hour or so describing the game and the different races and classes.
After that, they each picked what they wanted to be, and I explained each step of the creation process as I helped them build characters.
Apparently, one of the kids reads R.A. Salvatore, because as I talked about how rangers fight with either a bow or two weapons, one of them (we'll say Kid A) pipes up, "Like Drizzt?".
Cracked me up, but I let him create a drow ranger wielding dual scimitars. Just kind of ignored the LA, because (IMO) the main advantage to being a drow is the SR, and we're not going to be using that any time soon.
Kid B rolled pretty damn well, and made a... dual-wielding elven ranger.
Then there's a human sorcerer, a dwarven cleric, and an elven rogue who wields a bow.
Character concepts and creation took up the better part of an hour and a half, but after that we were set to go.
Posting the rest of the session now.

Elfin
2009-07-19, 07:29 PM
The players, admiring their newly-filled character sheets, found themselves in a small town at the edge of a forest. They had a discussion in which they all got their characters together, of course at a tavern, and after looking around the town they found out that goblin raiders have been attacking the few outlying farms.
After negotiating a price with the villagers, the party sets off into the forest where the goblin lair is thought to be.
While traveling, the party is beset by a vicious owlbear. It's a tough fight, and our Drizzt in residence takes heavy damage, but at last the they're able to slay it.
Later, they fight with a monstrous spider, but put it down easily.
The players got the combat system pretty easily, and since they had their bonuses out in front of them there weren't alot of questions about that. In the beginning they were kind of confused about where all the bonuses came from, but that's only to be expected.
Game continues next time.

dragoonsgone
2009-07-19, 07:46 PM
Sounds good and like you made the right choice. Hope yall have fun in future games.

Yakk
2009-07-20, 09:29 AM
The problem with 4e is that "the girlfriend" (which is a gaming trope, IMO) can't hide anymore. Before, there was always the fighter. You make the character, teach the person how to roll attack rolls with PA, and everything is fine. Now in 4e, the fighter is one of the hardest classes to make choices for and play.
Bow Ranger.

Twin Strike, Nimble Strike, Split the Tree, and the double-attack encounter one.

Burn the feat on a getting a d12 Bow (Num, d12s).

The only tricky part is Prime Shot and Hunter's Quarry.

JaxGaret
2009-07-20, 10:21 AM
Bow Ranger.

Twin Strike, Nimble Strike, Split the Tree, and the double-attack encounter one.

Burn the feat on a getting a d12 Bow (Num, d12s).

The only tricky part is Prime Shot and Hunter's Quarry.

No matter what class you use, it does get more and more complex as you get higher in level; a 3.5 Fighter doesn't necessarily need to get more complex as they go up in level, they can mostly just pile on the numbers (WF, WS, Improved Toughness, Iron Will, etc.). That said, I would actually have to recommend 3e over 4e - IF all of the PCs are non-casters only. Otherwise, 4e is a lot easier to pick up.

Also, I'm thinking that a Draconic Sorcerer would be the simplest build to play so far in 4e.

Oslecamo
2009-07-20, 10:27 AM
I'm not saying I agree with the direction Pathfinder is going; however I am saying that commercial support for 3E-compatible games is going to exist for quite awhile.

Who needs commercial suport for 3e? There's dozens of guys worcking in 3.75 versions, and hundreds making custom classes/monsters/spells, and all of them posting them on the net for free! So just read them and take whatever you like whitout paying a dime!:smallbiggrin:

Also, good to see the DM and group seem to be going well outside of the bat.

Kroy
2009-07-20, 10:32 AM
Sounds like you had fun! I apologized for being so harsh earlier. I just remember a thread similar to this one awhile back that posters spent the enire posting things like: "Try using a 3 stat system, since they probably can't remember 6" "Don't do any plot, as they probably play WoW so they obviously can't roleplay" etc..

Artanis
2009-07-20, 10:45 AM
and the double-attack encounter one.

Two-Fanged Strike

Elfin
2009-07-20, 01:54 PM
Ok, the rest of yesterday's session, if anyone's interested:
The players finally come to the ruin where the goblins live. I remind them to take out weapons, cast spells (the cleric had bless and protection from evil prepped).
The elven ranger bashed down their first door, and they found themselves in a guard room with a handful of goblins. It takes a little while, but by the time the fight's over the group has the basics of combat down (initiative, attacking, spells, damage).
A small dungeon filled with goblins and a couple worgs ensues, and finally there's a "boss fight" against a goblin fighter with a magic shortsword, and the big challenge, an ogre. It's tough; the sorcerer and the rogue are in negatives by the end, and everyone else is at one or two hitpoints, but the players are very satisfied and have gotten a good grasp of the game. The elven ranger takes the shortsword, and the cleric heals the rogue and stabilizes the sorcerer. They then disarm a simple trap, find a chest filled with the goblins' treasure, and return to town to claim their reward.
At this point we're running late, but still I help the kids level up their characters.
The dwarven cleric decides he wants to be an elf, and the ranger decides he wants to be a wild elf; I allow the changes.
We pack up and set off until next week.

Random832
2009-07-20, 01:58 PM
posters spent the enire posting things like: "Try using a 3 stat system, since they probably can't remember 6"

So what you're saying is that the entire Microlite20 project has no merit. (since obviously any simplification of anything is an insult to players' intelligence - so clearly we should still be playing second edition with THAC0, some rolls high others low, etc)

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-07-20, 02:23 PM
So what you're saying is that the entire Microlite20 project has no merit. (since obviously any simplification of anything is an insult to players' intelligence - so clearly we should still be playing second edition with THAC0, some rolls high others low, etc)

No, what he's saying is that you shouldn't assume that new players can't understand 6 stats or can't do anything more complex than WoW or things like that. Microlite is fine on its own merits, but insisting that people play it because they obviously can't handle anything more complicated is an insult to their intelligence.

FdL
2009-07-20, 02:26 PM
4e is easier to play, and I also think than to build your character too.

Kaiyanwang
2009-07-21, 02:09 AM
No, what he's saying is that you shouldn't assume that new players can't understand 6 stats or can't do anything more complex than WoW or things like that. Microlite is fine on its own merits, but insisting that people play it because they obviously can't handle anything more complicated is an insult to their intelligence.

Actually, Wow can be quite difficult in some istances, expecially in Pvp particular class vs particular class.

And Blizzard trasformed it in a more Dumbass-friendly version from classic to TBC to WotLK. But playability increased, so...

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-07-21, 07:54 AM
Actually, Wow can be quite difficult in some istances, expecially in Pvp particular class vs particular class.

And Blizzard trasformed it in a more Dumbsass-friendly version from classic to TBC to WotLK. But playability increased, so...

Precisely my point. Everyone thinks "Oh, those kids just play WoW, they must not have any real skill" when actually has a range of difficulty just like any other game, so saying "They can't do anything more complicated than WoW" does them a disservice.

paladin_carvin
2009-07-21, 10:14 AM
12 year olds get games- I am not surprised there were no problems with 3.5. The tough learners are those over 35, not those under 15. That, or people who do not play games of any time often (as someone put, 'the girlfriend'). I am prepping two games right now; one for my immediate family and one for my in-laws. This means working with 4 people over 40 (2 of them over 60) so my work is cut out for me. Here is what I've done to make things easier.

-Made all characters
-Decrease amount of skills to 15 (I'll post this list at the bottom of this post.
-All characters have this set of stats: 16,14,14,12,10,8
-No attacks of Op.
-Removed many detail rules, such as food, weight etc.
-Made up simpler character sheets

I think part of my problem is having too much time on my hands...

Animal Handling wis

Athletics str

Acrobatics dex

Awareness wis

Crafts dex

Deceit cha

Diplomacy cha

Knowledge Int

Mercantile Int

Nimble Dex

Perform cha

Spellcraft int

Stealth dex

Survival wis

Use Magic Device Int