Community

I am going to give a tentative for 4e. I don't know if I will like the final product, but I really like what I have read so far. I also love the rules used for Star Wars Saga more than I can express in words, so I have high hopes for 4e.

As for what I dislike about 3.5 edition, the list is way to long for me to put a comprehensive list here. I could just state EVERYTHING (the way you stated NOTHING), but in the interest of accuracy here were my top 10 concerns with 3.5 edition.

1) Static and unchanging classes that created the need for a plethora of prestige classes. This would in turn mean that character concepts that did not fit the static norms would often be hard to realize without having me (the GM) create a new prestige class for my players, or the NPC I was building. (I like the ability to pick and choose what abilities my character will get from his class level.)
3) Poorly balanced classes and prestige classes.
2) Inconsistent internal rules.
3) A combat system that led to very long character rounds, which often led to players sitting around and doing nothing for long stretches of time during combat.
4) As a GM, building quests and creating NPC's was FAR to complex, and not very rewarding.
5) It was impossible to build characters who fill more than a single "skillfull archtype" (due to the lack of skill points and class skill/cross class skill system used).
6) The same was true in regards to feats.
7) Levels 1-3 or 4 were not really worth playing. Characters had a tendency to die from a single lucky hit, or not get hit at all, which made building a story arc for these levels cumbersome. If I didn't fudge rolls, characters would often walk through an encounter without a scratch, or not walk through the encounter at all. Unlike some GM's, I don't enjoy character death. Characters should fear death and injury, but when my group actually dies the story I wrote for them is lost without every actually having been enjoyed by anyone.
8) I didn't like the cut and dry alignments. I felt these pegged people into a number of very finite niches that would remove from the complexity of a story I could create if I included morally gray characters.
9) Characters often felt broken without magic items to boost certain abilities (such as defense).
10) Some of the classes were definitively boring to play. In the end, a fighter pretty much did the same thing every round: he rolled to attack as many times as possible. (I like tactics and decision making to be a feature of every class, not just magic using classes.)

As for this "shouldn't they have gotten 3.5 edition right then?" complaint, no edition will ever get something fully right. The nature of persistent games is much like the nature of biological organisms, they adapt to the world around them. 3.5 was a good step from 3.0, which was a good step from 2e. Its time for the next step though, because 3.5 was far from perfect...