On 18 Aug 2006 at 8:38, Holmes, Erik wrote: > In a nutshell my problem with 4e is this: I don't see any improvement > over 3e and in fact I think 3e does just about everything better. I > think GURPS 3e is the best system out there. I would have much rather > seen 4e just clean it up a bit and make some of the optional rules > standard (like switching ST and HT) rather then change the entire > character creation system.
If I were to hand a bunch of players 3e's Basic Set, CI, Magic, and Psionics and say "250 points, go to it" the results would be _at least_ as bad. The guy who bought HP would be much weaker than the guy who bought DR instead. The psis and mages would be much more powerful than the supers, and so on. > I loved 3e (and still do) because I always felt that I could give a > group of players 150 points and they would all come up with the > characters that they wanted that were believable and ,even if > munchkined, balanced. 4e doesn't even come close. I bet you had a whole bunch of assumptions about what was reasonable and what was not. I suspect this is the same thing I saw with D&D when its thrid edtion came out. People were saying "3e sucks! It's crap compared to AD&D2!", when what they really meant was "I prefer AD&D2 with all my houserules to D&D3 as written", which is hardly a fair comparison. -- Rupert Boleyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
