do you prefer 3e 3.5e or pathfinder

[paladinofu.s.a]

I prefer 3.5e because it was the version I played first and it makes the most sense. What do you guys prefer.

[Eldan]

Strawberry is the flavour I always go back to. Everyone knows strawberry. That said, my real favourite is homemade hazelnut.

[hamlet]

None of the above.

[Jormengand]

Strawberry is the flavour I always go back to. Everyone knows strawberry. That said, my real favourite is homemade hazelnut.

Uh what?

In any case, PF. Because it's basically taking 3.5, making the tiers a little less horrific, and chucking the completely dysfunctional handbook out of the window.

[CowardlyPaladin]

How about Arcana Evolved if we are naming 3E systems.

My favorite is Pathfinder of the three though

[supermonkeyjoe]

Yes.

To clarify, I run a piecemeal version of 3rd edition with influences taken from 3e, 3.5, 3.p, 3rd party and 5th edition.

[The Rose Dragon]

I personally prefer Mutants & Masterminds.

[RFLS]

I'm really just a vanilla fan, myself. Maybe a bit of chocolate syrup.

[Reathin]

I haven't played pathfinder, but I like many of their design choices, especially since it's still modeled on the familiar 3.5. Would love to give it a try one day.

[Krazzman]

Depends on what I want to play:
Casters: Pathfinder.
Clerics/Druids: 3.5 or Pathfinder.
Anything else: 3.5.

For a few things I would like to have the Pathfinder version of the class (Fighter and Barbarian mainly).

Skill system would be pathfinder too but most feats I would rather take the 3.5 version than the PF version due to nerfs.

[Totally Guy]

There's an xkcd for that.

I'm the guy saying there's a whole world of games out there. And the 3.5 discussion is in the box.

[Waar]

No actually , personally I have always found that more local fantasy rpg creators are preferred.

[Dienekes]

I just raid 3.5 and Pathfinder for the good bits.

[navar100]

Pathfinder, mainly because of spruced-up classes. I like they were given more stuff to do, including the spellcasters. I like that each class has significant choices to make in development through class features and archetypes where as in 3E the choices were only in feats, spells, and whether to go into a prestige class. The tweaks in general from 3E I either like, don't care, or I've gotten over it already depending on the tweak.

I would still play a 3E game.

If there's no chocolate, it's not ice cream.

[paladinofu.s.a]

None of the above.

well which version do you like

[Eldariel]

3.0 was a great system with literally billions of flaws. 3.5 had some good ideas for fixes, and then some bad ones. PF had some more good ideas mixed in with bad ones. All of them have their sides, none of them is nearly satisfactory and if I had free hands to write one of my own and publish it, it'd be better than any of them and nearly problem-free. As it stands, I'm playing whatever my DM wants. If I'm DMing myself, I combine stuff from PF with ToB and such and call it a day unless I feel like drawing upon the infinite array of houserules (well, I always remove melee full attacks).

[Jeraa]

I prefer 3.0. With a bit of 3.5 and Pathfinder mixed in, a dash of 4e, and sprinkled with some 1st and 2nd edition AD&D ideas.

[erikun]

D&D3.5e has a SRD and is what my group is familiar with, so that's what we end up playing. I'm fine with using 3.0e and Pathfinder material, as long as it isn't abusive or broken.

However, I prefer another system entirely. There is almost nothing D&D3e does well, outside making spellcasters powerful, and there are even other systems that can give you powerful spellcasters.

[Amidus Drexel]

I'm really just a vanilla fan, myself. Maybe a bit of chocolate syrup.

Everyone knows chocolate is superior to vanilla, and that using a splash of chocolate syrup is only hiding the fact that your chassis is still pretty weak.

[hamlet]

well which version do you like

AD&D of either color and the Rules Cyclopedia.

[EccentricCircle]

I tend to use 3.5 as thats what I learnt to play first and have the most experience with. But I regularly use stuff from both 3e and Pathfinder books in my 3.5 games, as well as houseruling things for certain campaigns. I'd say that pathfinder is maybe a better renaisannce base than 3.5 but ultimately its similar enough to not be a major issue. I do prefer pathfinder skills though. really its apples and oranges.

But then again while I really like all the flavour they put into Oranges I find that the crunch is fairly lacking compared to the really good crunch you get with apples. Ideally i'd houserule the hell out of it so that it used the apple crunch but with all the orangy flavour. still, to each their own.

[The Fury]

I guess it depends on what sort of game I'm playing in. I have a lot of nostalgia for 3.0 and 3.5 both, but with that said nearly all 3.0 games I played in had a hefty amount of house rules and third party material heaped on. 3.5 was a bit more robust as a rules set but there seemed to still be an emphasis on Prestige Classes which I never liked. And yes, I am aware that originally Prestige Classes were for spicing-up NPCs but that doesn't change the fact that virtually everyone was planning on taking one as soon as they qualified for it. (I think. Maybe our group was just weird.)
Most of what was changed for Pathfinder was good though. I like that some skills were merged and I like how class features and levels were changed. The net result is that, in my opinion, Pathfinder was much kinder to Rogues, Fighters, and specialist wizards. It's for this reason that I tend to default to Pathfinder out of the three.
If for some unfathomable reason I wanted to play in an Epic Level game again I'd want to do it in 3.0 because it's the only version with a comprehensive ruleset for it, though I guess adapting it to 3.5 or Pathfinder wouldn't be so hard.

edit: I think the ice cream metaphor is lost on me, but I like chocolate/orange and I wonder why it's not available in my area.

[Geigan]

Strawberry is the flavour I always go back to. Everyone knows strawberry. That said, my real favourite is homemade hazelnut.

Chocolate and buttered pecan 4 life.

[TuggyNE]

Everyone knows chocolate is superior to vanilla, and that using a splash of chocolate syrup is only hiding the fact that your chassis is still pretty weak.

Chocolate with chocolate syrup is where it's at. (Metaphorically and literally.)

[BWR]

I prefer blue, though green tastes good too.

More seriously, Pathfinder, hands down.

[Eldonauran]

While 3.5E will always have a place in my heart (and 3.0E for that matter), I've got to give it up to Pathfinder. Of course, I do import some 3.5E material over to pathfinder on occasion. Still play a bit of 3.5E but always with some Pathfinder changes (like skills, feats every odd level and polymorph rules).

[Kaun]

Your choice in ice cream is bad! My choice of ice cream is far superior!

ALTER YOUR OPINIONS!

[Hiro Protagonest]

Uh what?

Playgrounders have long memories, mostly thanks to bookmarking.

well which version do you like

Gelato.

[Rhynn]

well which version do you like

I, for one, like ACKS, Artesia: Adventures in the Known World, and RuneQuest a lot more. Out of d20 games, Mutants & Masterminds (2nd ed.) and Mongoose's Conan RPG are my favorites.

Basically, almost any other RPG is better at delivering a specific experience than the very generic D&D 3.X, because they've been tailored for that specific experience. And most RPGs are much, much lighter on the rules than D&D 3.X.

PS. People are messing with you because this is not the D&D 3E/d20 subforum, this is the general RPG subforum (but not the "other RPG systems" subforum, either).

[Kaun]

PS. People are messing with you because this is not the D&D 3E/d20 subforum, this is the general RPG subforum (but not the "other RPG systems" subforum, either).

Could just be a general distaste for edition debates.