All three are widely used variants & all are "good".
3. Nc3 is the most natural continuation (according to Max Euwe) and the main line
3. exd (exchange variation) causes no difficulty for black and essentially avoids "the French" if you don't want to play against it
3. e5 (advance variation) is sound (originally criticized by Tarrasch but proved OK by Nimzowitch and others)
3. Nd2 (Tarrasch variation) is often used these days
I think the three you mention are all equally "tactical"
Thanks alot Phobetrix! I think I'll go with 3.exd5 (which I hadn't really though of before you mentioned it) as that skirts the French and thus hopefully avoids all the theory behind it that i don't know.
Yes, it avoids the French, but I think it also avoids a lot of fun 
So may be later on, if you are interested, there is an excellent book on the French (from both sides): "The Flexible French" by GM Viktor Moskalenko
I played the French defense myself for a long time, and I play e4 as White, so I have some experience here.
e5, the Advance Variation, is playable, but not considered terribly strong. I still choose the a French if I think there's a good chance my opponent will play this.
exd5, the Exchange Variation, is also playable and easy, but doesn't present Black with many problems. Black's main concession in the French defense in exchange for his counterplay is the cramping of the position due to the pawn of e6, and in this variation, you get rid of it for him immediately!
Nd2, the Tarrasch variation, is one of the more testing variations. It's what I myself play as White, because I found it the most irritating to play as a French player. However, it's much quieter & more positional than the main lines. If you're looking for a tactical continuation, this isn't really it.
Nc3 represents the main lines. Many/most players will oblige you to follow with Bb4, the Winawer variation. It's extremely tactical and sharp; rather theory-heavy, but the burden is on Black. Some players will play Nf6 or dxe4 instead; these are also good for White. That would be my recommendation for you.
The Reti gambit (2 b3) is a good, unusual and exciting try - I've scored very well in over-the-board games against higher rated opponents who have underestimated its strength, and won practically every French game in internet blitz. There are some tutorials on You Tube. More recently I've turned to the KIA, since black would normally like to play e5 against it, but has already commited to 1 e6. This is why the KIA is more potent against the French than other defences.
I think I'll experiment with 3.exd5 and 3.Nc3 for awhile and see which I like better.
Thanks a lot guys!
Although I don't play it anymore, I used to always respond to 1. e4 with the French. I can tell you I hated when someone played the Exchange against me. I never thought it was as fun, so that's something to consider. You will most likely annoy black and you narrow down your studying to one variation. Almost any titled player will tell you that Nc3 is the way to play for an advantage against the French. If you play that, you could face the Winawer variation and it's an ocean of theory. The Advance variation is ok, but most French specialists love to see it. It was my favorite to play against. The Tarrasch is certainly solid and will give you even chances.
if it's a stronger player you're up against, exd5 is probably not your best bet. I've read that by the time black answers, it's an equal game, and from my experience I believe that. Nc3 is by far the most tactical and the response that I personally score the least well against, but to be fair that's only my experience.
You could try Nc3 first, and play the winawer, etc. thats pretty tactical. I used to do this but did not like the positions I got from it, too do or die sort of thing.
But winawer variation is not a choice white can make for black. Black can opt to not play Bb4.
i enjoy the exchange/monte carlo variation (since i prefer open, attacking games)
I prefer Nc3, but you have to watch for many lines in this variaton. The exchange variaton is also a good choice, but it'll end usually in equal play, and it's not so tactician. Try some variatons, and choose the one, which fits your style.
I have actually made a couple of videos on how to play against the french. My recommendation there was to play Nc3 and follow up with exd5 when black playes Bb4. Which is a very annoying idea to meet as a french player.
Check the videos out if you like!
http://www.youtube.com/user/conzipe (Look at the playlist called "terminating the french")
Congratulations conzipe for a very clear, entertaining and scholarly set of videos!
As a French player for about 20 years, I'll tell you my experience with all of these lines as Black and White:
Advance: not suited for tactically-oriented unless you want to hone the Millner-Barry Gambit. White's center comes under attack by c5 & f6 almost instantly.
Exchange: releases the central tension far too soon. Black Equalizes or worse if he's paying attention. Usually played by lazy people who don't want to study anything against the French or who just want to get away from Black's preparations.
KIA variation: lame. I love to see this as Black.
2. b3... odd and if White has to play e5, the Bishop does nothing at all.
Tarrasch: a good, solid variation, but not really the thing for a more tactically-minded player. Endless teensy manouvers and positional pitfalls for both sides.
This leaves 3. Nc3 with all the Winawer & Classical lines like the McCutcheon & Aljechin-Chatard Attack. This is what I'm interested in as White.
KIA variation: lame. I love to see this as Black.
I'm surprised by this comment - have you got a special way to deal with the KIA that isn't in the books ? All the lines that I've studied give White at least a small edge going into the middle game, and if Black makes even a small mistake he tends to get rolled over.
I'm surprised by this comment - have you got a special way to deal with the KIA that isn't in the books ? All the lines that I've studied give White at least a small edge going into the middle game, and if Black makes even a small mistake he tends to get rolled over.
What's your source for this evaluation? Some "Play the King's Indian Attack!" book? I don't think the KIA is awful, but it puts no pressure at all on Black, so the 2nd player can set up with anything he likes. The merit of the opening is that it consistently and easily produces an unbalanced middlegame with chances for both sides, that's slightly offbeat from the main lines.
... which, in this case, is exactly what a French defense player aims for. You play 1...e6, and you're giving up a concession (cramped position and/or isolated d-pawn) in exchange for an asymmetrical game with opportunities for counterattack. When you play the KIA in return, you're giving them that free, not even trying to take advantage of what the French player is giving you. That spells a much easier game than what they'd be facing in a Winawer or Tarrasch.
KIA variation: lame. I love to see this as Black.
I'm surprised by this comment - have you got a special way to deal with the KIA that isn't in the books ? All the lines that I've studied give White at least a small edge going into the middle game, and if Black makes even a small mistake he tends to get rolled over.
The line recommended by Psakhis in The Complete French (involving Nf6 instead of the c5 ideas) seems to work out pretty well.
There are some really great ideas here! i love your plan of the 'delayed exchange'! But I think your judgement of other lines was somewhat too simple and does not touch on many different ideas that may exist in the positions that could change your mind about them (I dont think Be7 'refutes' the tarrasch for example...consider 1e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nd2 Be7 4 Bd3 c5 (4...nf6 5 e5 Nfd7 6 Qg4!) 5. dc!)...anyway i might try your idea of nc3 and ed...im only concerned that black will respond with Qxd5 instead of ed.
The reason why Tarrasch isn't played so much on the high level anymore is because of 3... Be7, of course I didn't want to get into to much detail about it, I just wanted to show the general idea. I will maybe do a more detailed video about 3...Be7 in a future video. Still the idea is generally new and I'm sure someday someone will find a good idea for white to keep the Tarrasch going.
Also If you saw my videos carefully you would also see that I recommended something against Qxd5 which more or less refutes the move, so it's really nothing to be worried about.
Hope that clears things up!
Conzipe's videos on the French are very good and well made, certainly recommendable. Of course, one does not need to accept all the ideas and I agree with Fiveofswords that 3...Be7 is definitely not "the end" of the Tarrasch variation. 4. Bd3 is a strong continuation for white.
Btw, the 3......Be7 is not extremely new in Tarrasch but apparently rediscovered by GM Oleg Romanishin in the mid 1970's. According to GM V. Moskalenko the main idea behind this move is to "wait and see white's piece setting and react accordingly"
May I also suggest the King's Indian Attack against the French defense
The KIA was already discussed above in this thread. In my view it is a fair approach by a white player who does not want to get involved with the real French. In that sense equivalent to the exchange variation. I may well be completely wrong, but I feel the same as other posters above that the KIA is not taking out all the "force" available for white in the French. That said, white certainly needs to know quite a bit of opening theory (and have experience) to enter into a "real" French game. The exchange variation and the KIA are "ways out" 
Hi, I'm lower rated player and I'm trying to work out an opening repetoire. I've come up against the French once or twice while playing as white and I'm not sure what's my best response after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5.
I've thought of 3.e5 as I've heard of the advantages of gaining extra space and owning more of the center but as a more tactically minded player I am leery of a closed center. I've also thought of 3.Nc3 or 3.Nd2.
What do you think is best? What do think is suited for a more tactical style?