ok, first of all people that cry about how 4E feels like an MMO, are grasping at straws. Tell them it's a game and get over it :P.

As for Pathfinder, well, It fixed some things, and made others worse. I looked over the free "beta" and liked what i saw for Sorceror...but that class didn't need any fixing. I laughed at the fighetr changes and pretty much stopped paying attention after that.

Pathfinder falls into the same hole 3 and 3.5 did, they thought feats = spells. They just don't compare...

Feats add bonuses to attacks, or avoid AoO, or maybea neat trick out of combat.

Spelss deal damage, mold battlefields, and summon allies to fight for you.

Also there are a number of spells that copy what feats do, but not a single feat that copies what a spell does.

You maybe saying "Well that was a problem in 3x!" I'm sorry to inform you it's still a problem in Pathfinder.

That out of the way, Pathfinder builds on options found in Unearthed Arcana, and fix'd a few other holes players have cried about since the dawn of 3E. They work to streamline some roles, while keeping it as true as possiable to 3.5.

So if you were only allowed to play one version for the rest of your life, would you pick 3e, 3.5e, Pathfinder, or 4e?

 2ndE baby!!

hrmmm, that is the million dollar question...

I played 2nd, and found some of the rules pretty, silly, so I quickly moved on to 3rd.

3rd was perfect when it first came out, yeah my grips above and all, but I really enjoyed a lot of the rules, and idea presented to me in just the 3 core rule books. My first character was a sorceror and later took levels in cleric, shit was awesome. I how badass my fighter felt, until the wizard started raining down magic missiles, and fireballs ,and all sorts of other stuff. I didn't think I should be doing as much damage to the spellcasters, but i thought I should have a better place in the game tan I did, which pretty muc hwas an extra turn for the party to regroup and figure out what to kill next.

I skipped 3.5 for the most part. I remember looking through the books and feeling like nothing changed. No fix for fighters, nerf on the monks and rangers. While Sorceror/Wizard was pretty much untouched. After reading these books I had a feeling I knoew which classes people at WotC played when they played D&D. I also felt some of the rules were starting to get silly again. Skill checks for everyday banter between PC's and NPC's. Rules and skillchecks seemed to be coming out for the sake of having rules and skillchecks. The system was starting to get bogged down with werid rules and extra actions that for the most part I ignored.

I remember when I first heard about Pathfinder, I was really excited. Finally someone has heard my cries and has fix'd the things that are really wrong with an otherwise awesome game. I got the free public beta from pazio was again disappointed that the feat are not equal to spells thing was going on again.  Fighters got a boost, but not much of one, an extra bonus to armor, and extra bonus to attack with a type of weapon, but nothing people weren't just doing in their basements already. When I read the Sorceror entry I was both shocked and amazed at how awesome spellcasters had become, I can't see any reason to no play a spellcaster in Pathfinder. All the options spellcasters get, other classes should have gotten to in some form or fashion.

I remember reading after gencon one year that they are coming out with 4E. After reading the books a week early in my stockroom at Waldens and the PDF's on my computer at home I wasn't sure what to make of this new edition. I  wasn't sure what I was expecting, but what I got wasn't it. Everything seemed...werid...yeah, werid. I made my first character, a dragonborn paladin, and started playing and to my surpise it was pretty cool and I enjoyed it much like i enjoyed my first character in 3rd edition. However, I'd be lying if I didn't say Iwasn't making comparisons to Warcraft that frist few months...of course I'd be lying if I said I wasn't making comparisons to 3rd edition when I started playing Warcraft. Does 4E feel like an MMO? I don't think so, I think it feels like a tactical wargame...much like how chainmail felt, remember chainmail?

Is 4E all good? not by a longshot. I do get confused sometimes what rules mean, or what certain actions completely entail. A quick read of some the rules leaves them very open to what they mean. It's alright I guess, no majot complaint about being able to decide  for myself what  rule means, but it would be nice if there were more than 3 soild rules to gameplay

roll a d20
if the rules don't say you can't, you can
and rules are excetions when the above doesn't apply

not word for word, but thats pretty much what they boil down to.

To answer the question I'd probably have to say this: If I was only allowed to play on game for the rest of my life? I'd fill a bathtub full of warm water stil down in it and slit my wrists open and wait for my life to slowly drain out of me...but before that I'd probably play 4E i guess.

3.5e, fo' sho.

That's quite a dissertation, Arkus, but I do agree with you on most all points.  You actually reminded me of another great part of 3e - the feats available to fighter types.  I mean, I agree that they don't compare to what spellcasters had available, but a fighter with all his feats could still be pretty formidable.  That actually makes me want to try DMing a game of 3e/Pathfinder more.

I don't know how I feel about spellcasters getting a boost in Pathfinder, though.  That may break them if it wasn't handled carefully.  I'll probably have to just get the rules (or read them for free at Paizo's website) and find out.

I've been running Pathfinder forawhile and it's a really good game.

First of all, i love they fixed the god awful mess that was the Grapple rules. Now, all you have to do is beat a score called a Combat Manuever Defense (it's a lot like a second armor class) to grapple, bull rush, trip, and other similar actions.

I actually like what they did to the fighter. I think Paizo made them more enjoyable to play than before.  I always got bored with the whole "fighters only gain feats" thing and I like the adding of special abilities that raise attack/damage bonuses and allow you to move a lot easier in your armor.

While the spellcasters have been boosted slightly, so have the other classes. The game is still balanced, but not to the point that everything starts to look the same after awhile (one of my big complaints with 4th edition).

While there are soe minor problems, you can say that about every game out there. The good thing is, most of the small problems in Pathfinder can easily be fixed with house rules.