Olive
Sneak
57 Posts
    
 | | 05/09/2005 6:33 AM |
| | recovered topic 3419 | |
| |
|
Olive
Sneak
57 Posts
| | 05/09/2005 6:33 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Iksander
I once read that Erik Mona's game was good because everyone, including him, knew the rules like the backs of their hands. I'm not sure if that's a good or a bad thing anymore.
It's a great thing. | |
| |
|
Wrackspawn
ChristopherGroves
Warlord
6093 Posts
| | 05/09/2005 8:37 AM |
| I actually agree but with different reasoning and with a different caveat.
In previous editions there were a number of ... arbitrary ... factors. In 3.x everything is far more evenly scaled, etc. This lends itself quite well to more cooperative / competitive environments. Living Greyhawk can be far more equal in the d20 system. It ports much more easily to miniatures and computer games.
But in losing some of those arbitrary concepts and instead replacing them with defined, concrete and specific rules and introducing the "fairness" I think it detracted some from the sense of wonderment.
"Can I jump the chasm?"
"Er ... no, your base speed and jump skill aren't high enough to possibly do it."
The outcome is known ahead of time ... and given the specific and known nature of the rules this erodes somewhat the suspension of disbelief for some number of the players and DM. It is no longer "wow ... maybe ... this is going to be hard ... " and is instead "no way unless the DM bends the rules".
Still, I hardly have time to roleplay these days - certainly not to the degree I would like. I do love the skirmish game and the 3.x PC games though, and the new system lends itself quite well to those. | |
Triangle DDM Skirmish Group | My Email | 45-ish trades and counting | Stuff for Trade
* * * Show your brother some love and click here * * * | |
|
Thoth, Gatherer of Knowledge
MerricB
Underboss
2350 Posts
Australia
| | 05/09/2005 10:25 AM |
| Funny, my best games have been in 3e!
The trick is to properly understand your relationship with the rules.
I know the combat rules very well. Enough so I don't have to keep looking things up (except possibly for grappling). However, in non-combat play, I run things a lot more fast and loose. The skill bonuses and rolls the PCs can make are still very important - but I'm not so constrained by what it says on a chart.
Cheers! | |
Merric Blackman
| |
|
Oni
Underboss
1131 Posts
| | 05/09/2005 12:29 PM |
| Well my best games have been 3.0 D20. I loved the updated rules for Masque of the Red Death. Although I say this because I love running a good mystery as much as my players like playing in them.
I however am currently in love with AEG's Roll & Keep rules. It was hard to get use to, but great now. | |
"...don’t try to outweird me, I get stranger things than you free with my breakfast cereal."
- Zaphod Beeblebrox
Champion of the Nymph!
| |
|
thom
Sergeant
472 Posts
| | 05/09/2005 12:38 PM |
| Hmmm...Do you guys have lots of "barracks room lawyers" in your group? Do your PCs basically trust that the DM knows the rules well enuff and isn't trying to shaft them? Those are the problems I've seen in the groups I've been with regardless of the edition we played. And because of that I love 3.0/3.5 because it does seem to cut down on that. And I'm willing to memorize the rules to "keep on top". But, yeah, I do miss some of the "wonder" of 1st Edition...
| |
MY TRADES & references | |
|
Pale Rider
Underboss
1006 Posts
London, Ontario, Canada
| | 05/10/2005 7:54 AM |
| I can't wrap my brain around this arguement. You don't like 3E because it no longer relies on DM fiat and has rules for most stuff. And even has a framework for making up stuff on the fly (decide on a skill the task falls under-assign a DC-roll or use an ability check there are even guidelines in the DMG for when to do this too).
In 1E I recall having to make crap up all the time - most often broken stupid stuff too that no one had ever played before since I just made it up. In 3E my players still do the fun cool stuff (I had a guy make a molotov cocktail out of a lantern, alchemist fire and wooden splinters - I used the gernade-like weapon rules, assigned a -4 penalty for using an improvised weapon and aded 1d4 damage due to the splinters) and now we have rules for them succeeding or not. Just because someone comes up with a neat idea does not mean it should automatically succeed. | |
Completed Trades: Crescent Hawk, Vimes, demagogue, vidman, Eric is God, Strachan Fireblade, FungiMuncher, Dudeeehm, Shasack, gausse, kyrin, nyjastul69
Champion of the Remorhaz | |
|
Wrackspawn
ChristopherGroves
Warlord
6093 Posts
| | 05/10/2005 9:12 AM |
| That's not what I said, for sure.
What I said is by becoming more specific and uniform it becomes less arbitrary and vague ... and that has a small effect on the suspension of disbelief.
I didn't say I did not like 3e, just that it has less mystery inherent in the system itself ... less wonderment, more "oh yeah that's a DC x check for skill Y".
My point was/is that I can certaily see Iksander's point. The games I've played in the different systems have had definitely a different tone. The 3x versions, as I said, do lend themselves much better to tactical combat and adaption into other systems (skirmish games, PC games, etc.)
Side topic question: Before DDM came out, what was the % breakdown of games from 1/2e versus 3e where you used miniatures and full-scale maps? | |
Triangle DDM Skirmish Group | My Email | 45-ish trades and counting | Stuff for Trade
* * * Show your brother some love and click here * * * | |
|
Pale Rider
Underboss
1006 Posts
London, Ontario, Canada
| | 05/10/2005 9:28 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by ChristopherGroves
Side topic question: Before DDM came out, what was the % breakdown of games from 1/2e versus 3e where you used miniatures and full-scale maps?
All D&D games I've played in, regardless of edition, have used miniatures and some sort of scale (haven't always had a battlemat but used to used 1inch = 10feet scale). I am probably not the norm though. I have never held the rules of the game to hold 'wonderment' - that is what the DM is there for. The rules are the framework to build 'wonderment' around. | |
Completed Trades: Crescent Hawk, Vimes, demagogue, vidman, Eric is God, Strachan Fireblade, FungiMuncher, Dudeeehm, Shasack, gausse, kyrin, nyjastul69
Champion of the Remorhaz | |
|
Fry
Underboss
1724 Posts
| | 05/10/2005 11:49 AM |
| | Before DDM, I had never played a game that used miniatures or a map of any sort. Always verbal descriptions. Gotta say I like maps and miniatures and being able to do tactical movement. | |
"Why am I all sticky and naked? Did I miss something fun?"
-Vindicated champion of Tordek, Dwarf Champion | |
|
sterling40
Sergeant
572 Posts
| | 05/10/2005 6:50 PM |
| what i miss most, honestly, were character "kits" and "specialty priests"
you could adapt your character more to what you wanted it to do, just by using the rules from a splat book.
now a days, its all in feats and skills.
my all time favorite character was a specialty priest of Tempus, it was in the lines of a fighter/cleric/berzerker, but all in one class. Sure it had its drawbacks.
But what i find with 3-3.5 ed is that the difference between one cleric and the next are marginal at best. | |
Knight of Pixies
Champion of Mephits
"how many boards would the orc hoards hoard, if the orc hoards would hoard boards?"
| |
|
Thoth, Gatherer of Knowledge
MerricB
Underboss
2350 Posts
Australia
| | 05/10/2005 8:31 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by ChristopherGroves
Side topic question: Before DDM came out, what was the % breakdown of games from 1/2e versus 3e where you used miniatures and full-scale maps?
The polls I've done on ENworld and Dragonsfoot have shown that 1e and 2e players use miniatures or other tokens at about the same proportion as 3e players. It's about 15%-20% who don't use any form of representation.
Cheers! | |
Merric Blackman
| |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 05/10/2005 8:45 PM |
| We've always used miniatures and maps for the most part, across all 3 editions. (Showing my age I guess.)
I don't really think 3.5 has more rules than other editions. I think it has less, really, in that the mechanics for resolving situations are far more regular, so there's only the one primary mechanic (the d20 DC check) to keep in mind. The one place I think it differs is in the addition of a real mechanic for social interaction (the diplomacy, bluff, and intimidate skills) which was just covered by role-playing before. I'm pretty ambivalent about that, I can see doing without those 3 skills, but in large part the system is a lot cleaner and clearer than it used to be, in my opinion. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
Knight of Argenis
Corim Danex
Warlord
6614 Posts
West Valley City, Utah
| | 05/10/2005 8:59 PM |
| | Overall, I much prefer 3.X D&D over earlier versions. It can be really difficult specializing a character with a low intelligence. I realize this is a trade off. But the rogue class gets a huge skills bonus over other classes. There are times I have characters with a lot more skill points than I need. But there are also times when I can't really do much of anything in the way of specializing due to class/int combinations. | |
"Look to God and live." Alma 37:47
Vindicated Champ of Hippogriff (Arcadian Hippogriff) and Uncommon Horse | |
|
mazra
Sergeant
352 Posts
Canton, GA
| | 05/10/2005 10:27 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
We've always used miniatures and maps for the most part, across all 3 editions. (Showing my age I guess.)
I know how you feel. I bought my first lead figurine back in 1977. I have played and DMed in all versions; and 3.5 is the very best. There is still plenty of situations that can't be determined by a skill check. Anyway, the DM still controls the game. That's why I use a DM screen. [:)]
I agree that with my growing forgetfulness, trying to remember all the rules can be a problem. But, if the DM is fair, DM screen or not, the players will respect the rulings and the games will be enjoyable. When I start a new campaign with new players, I do set ground rules. And ground rule number one is that the DM is sometimes wrong. But this is only a game. Get over it, and move on!
Another Side Bar: This just recently came up. Can a Rogue take two Sneak Attacks when he is allowed multiple attacks in a round? I ruled that he could not. That a Sneak Attack requires some extra concentration on the part of the Rogue in order to hit the target in a lethal location. If I am wrong about this, I will still let my ruling stand, for afterall I am the DM; and sometimes I jsut don't agree with the rules. However, I am curious if I just missed something in the rule.
Thanks for the oportunity to chat.
Have a Blessed and Good Day,
Mazra
| | | |
|
Thoth, Gatherer of Knowledge
MerricB
Underboss
2350 Posts
Australia
| | 05/10/2005 10:33 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by mazra
Another Side Bar: This just recently came up. Can a Rogue take two Sneak Attacks when he is allowed multiple attacks in a round? I ruled that he could not. That a Sneak Attack requires some extra concentration on the part of the Rogue in order to hit the target in a lethal location. If I am wrong about this, I will still let my ruling stand, for afterall I am the DM; and sometimes I jsut don't agree with the rules. However, I am curious if I just missed something in the rule.
Yes, a rogue may sneak attack as many times in a round as he has attacks.
Here are the articles explaining the ability:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040217a
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040224a
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040302a **
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040309a
Part 3 (marked with **) clarifies that you can get multiple sneak attacks.
Cheers! | |
Merric Blackman
| |
|
wicked cool
Underboss
2083 Posts
| | 05/10/2005 11:10 PM |
| | I love 3.5. As a PC and a as a DM i have more resources at my fingertips than ever before. I create a character almost exactly as envisioned and i can "clearly develop" its progress throughout the campaign. Rules are laid out in stone and the jump from 3.0 to 3.5 was better than i could imagine | |
The ROCK layeth the smacketh down. Long live Farscape
Vindicated-CHAMPION of the INTELLECT DEVOURER
i will change my avatar when martin completes dances with dragons | |
|
Oni
Underboss
1131 Posts
| | 05/10/2005 11:21 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by sterling40
what i miss most, honestly, were character "kits" and "specialty priests"
you could adapt your character more to what you wanted it to do, just by using the rules from a splat book.
now a days, its all in feats and skills.
my all time favorite character was a specialty priest of Tempus, it was in the lines of a fighter/cleric/berzerker, but all in one class. Sure it had its drawbacks.
I loved the Noble Warrior kit for some odd reason [)]. Looking back the drawbacks seem worse than what I got, but boy it was fun Role-Playing it. | |
"...don’t try to outweird me, I get stranger things than you free with my breakfast cereal."
- Zaphod Beeblebrox
Champion of the Nymph!
| |
|
Testament
Underboss
1397 Posts
| | 05/11/2005 8:34 PM |
| Sterling40, either you've got munchkins who are playing power-built clerics, they aren't roleplaying, or you've got a tiny pantheon. I find that different clerics can be wildly different, for starters, there's the two main archetypes:
Turn & Burn (Magic and turning)
Smite! (Combat based self-buffing fighter)
Throw in domain choice, feat selection and how they're played, and IME, clerics can be wildly different to one another. | |
Support awesome games: Play Hecatomb!
8-Bit Chibi Goths forever!
Champion of Mephistopheles
"Sorry! I was tryin' to open these beans!"
My Have/Want List, (Updated July 6 2004, will be updated soon)
| |
|
Thoth, Gatherer of Knowledge
MerricB
Underboss
2350 Posts
Australia
| | 05/11/2005 9:34 PM |
| The "kit" of 2e has been replaced by the feats and skill choices you make.
Speciality Priests (apart from being another way to break 2e) can be approximated by some prestige classes (there were some very good ones in Dragon magazine a few years back), or by creating your own class - which is what they were, in any case.
The 2e system of spheres led to some terribly unbalanced priests.
Cheers! | |
Merric Blackman
| |
|
Blade
Sergeant
412 Posts
| | 05/11/2005 9:43 PM |
| | The first 3 years that I played I never saw a Mini or any thing other than a pen and paper. I still love this stile of play the best, but the minis are fun and I must say that they do help new players as they are geting to know the game. | |
"All For The Game"
Champion of the Horned Devil (BW vindicated) Champion of Wulfgar(icon-4 vindicated) Champion of Catti Brie
Night Below Called Shot: Bruenor
Desert of Desolation Called Shot: Bruenor
Reference Thread:
http://www.maxminis.com/Forums/tabid/104/view/topic/forumid/53/postid/435711/Default.aspx | |
|
wicked cool
Underboss
2083 Posts
| | 05/11/2005 10:33 PM |
| | Thats a good point Blade. without 3.0 and 3.5 combat there is probably no miniature game. Combat in my opinion is 10x more fearsome in these version than in old versions. Dragons as said earlier are very nasty now | |
The ROCK layeth the smacketh down. Long live Farscape
Vindicated-CHAMPION of the INTELLECT DEVOURER
i will change my avatar when martin completes dances with dragons | |
|
Thoth, Gatherer of Knowledge
MerricB
Underboss
2350 Posts
Australia
| | 05/11/2005 11:16 PM |
| Minis were used in previous editions, but the editions were written to take advantage of them in the same way that 3e is.
Cheers! | |
Merric Blackman
| |
|
Oni
Underboss
1131 Posts
| | 05/11/2005 11:23 PM |
| Well to be fair my first game used minis. Just not in combat. When we would roll up new characters we would drive up to the nearest gaming store (about an hour away). We used them to show marching orders, and what not.
We would have used them for combat even, but we had very little money at the time. That was back in the late 80's early 90's. | |
"...don’t try to outweird me, I get stranger things than you free with my breakfast cereal."
- Zaphod Beeblebrox
Champion of the Nymph!
| |
|
Fun Guy from Yuggoth
Cthulhufnord
Warlord
10787 Posts
Umass Amherst Baby!
| | 05/11/2005 11:27 PM |
| | Ah yes the vaunted tradition of Marching Order... I'm not sure it realy effected any of the past D&D games I've been in. I always had the sneaking suspicion that the DM simply had us state the order to make us nervous. | |
Pathetic Earthlings. Hurling your bodies out into the void - without the slightest inkling of who or what is out here. If you had known anything about the true nature of the universe - anything at all - you would have hidden from it in terror. | |
|
Blade
Sergeant
412 Posts
| | 05/11/2005 11:30 PM |
| | I was in college when I played my first game. We never even thought about the need for Minis, but I think that was because we were all art students. I don't know what we love more playing the game or drawing all the worlds and things that we found in the game. That was and still is the best part of D&D for me at least. | |
"All For The Game"
Champion of the Horned Devil (BW vindicated) Champion of Wulfgar(icon-4 vindicated) Champion of Catti Brie
Night Below Called Shot: Bruenor
Desert of Desolation Called Shot: Bruenor
Reference Thread:
http://www.maxminis.com/Forums/tabid/104/view/topic/forumid/53/postid/435711/Default.aspx | |
|
Thoth, Gatherer of Knowledge
MerricB
Underboss
2350 Posts
Australia
| | 05/11/2005 11:30 PM |
| Hehe.
It's been very important in my 3e games...
Cheers! | |
Merric Blackman
| |
|
Blade
Sergeant
412 Posts
| | 05/11/2005 11:47 PM |
| ? What part are you talking about?
"It's been very important in my 3e games" | |
"All For The Game"
Champion of the Horned Devil (BW vindicated) Champion of Wulfgar(icon-4 vindicated) Champion of Catti Brie
Night Below Called Shot: Bruenor
Desert of Desolation Called Shot: Bruenor
Reference Thread:
http://www.maxminis.com/Forums/tabid/104/view/topic/forumid/53/postid/435711/Default.aspx | |
|
Fun Guy from Yuggoth
Cthulhufnord
Warlord
10787 Posts
Umass Amherst Baby!
| | 05/12/2005 12:28 AM |
| | Granted Marching Order does determine who hits the traps first, but it's realy up to the DM who gets attacked by what monster. Come to think of it, dungeons never realy showed up that much in our games. Most of it was wilderness encounters and epic battles. | |
Pathetic Earthlings. Hurling your bodies out into the void - without the slightest inkling of who or what is out here. If you had known anything about the true nature of the universe - anything at all - you would have hidden from it in terror. | |
|
glauron
Underboss
1379 Posts
Sydney, Australia
| | 05/12/2005 2:36 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Testament
Sterling40, either you've got munchkins who are playing power-built clerics, they aren't roleplaying, or you've got a tiny pantheon. I find that different clerics can be wildly different, for starters, there's the two main archetypes:
Turn & Burn (Magic and turning)
Smite! (Combat based self-buffing fighter)
Throw in domain choice, feat selection and how they're played, and IME, clerics can be wildly different to one another.
Absolutely right. I mostly play clerics. No two have ever been remotely alike.
But getting back to what Iskander started, 3.5 can be taxing if you want to be a stickler for the rules. Our group has 5 DMs and the other two who play regularly know the rules at least as well when it comes to what their characters can and cannot do. This can lead to some "discussion" on certain rulings. Just prepare well, and be right most of the time. And have fun.
If I read between the lines, Iskander is lamenting the lack of spontaniety and fun if 3.5 is rigorously applied. | |
I have always been here. | |
|
Iksander
Underboss
1010 Posts
| | 05/12/2005 4:10 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by glauron
If I read between the lines, Iskander is lamenting the lack of spontaniety and fun if 3.5 is rigorously applied.
Pretty much. I was trying to figure out why my games lacked that certain something that I didn't seem to have to strive for when I ran 2e games. In my opinion, I think that the flexibility allowed by a lack of rules and the fact that players can't question you as readily, meant a much easier, and faster flow to a game. I, and the players, didn't have measured limits, so consciously or subconsciously, we didn't limit our characters or the story by the rules.
quote:
Originally posted by wicked cool
Combat in my opinion is 10x more fearsome in these version than in old versions. Dragons as said earlier are very nasty now
One thing I *really* hated about 2e was how goddamn wimpy dragons were. I remember being utterly disappointed with a dragon combat in a DL game I ran where the dragon was barely a hiccup to the players. After that, I always boosted dragons stats and made built them up as being an encounter you wanted to avoid at all costs. But it wasn't until 3.x that players really FEARED dragons. | |
Bite me. | |
|
Monsoon28
Underboss
2290 Posts
Toronto
| | 05/12/2005 8:45 AM |
| Going back to the topic of Kits, I never liked them much they somehow always lacked a certain something. Whereas in 3.x I loved the use of PrC's and Feats I think the system for these is totally better.
The funny thing about sterling40's ending comment is that I felt the exactly opposite, I found that there were virtually no differences with characters of the same class, where as with 3E two clerics (or whatever) can be completely different. | |
"I was sittin' here eatin' my muffin, drinkin' my coffee, replayin' the incident in my head, when I had what alcoholics refer to as a moment of clarity." - Jules Winnfield
Sales/Trades Bad (1): Ironfist Boulderbender
Trades/Sales completed (8.): Danthl, Dafrca, Garyaxe, qillan_dvra, realmaster, Vandal_Savage, cavedweller, unearthed arcana.
Champion of Gem Dragons, VINDICATED Squire of Duergar Commander, Knight of the Astral Stalker.
| |
|
bshugg
Underboss
1814 Posts
| | 05/12/2005 9:09 AM |
| the 3.x books have breathed new life in to the DnD game system. Players are crawling out of the woodwork to play around my area. I love how easy it is for new players to pick up, and how you can custom make your characters with feats, skills and a balanced multiclassing system. If handled properly even prestige classes can be cool. Handled properly meaning used sparingly as rewards for in game play.
Now for the problems. Well, I love the rules and game system, but hate the 340238408328 different feats,spells and prestige classes that every new product seems to be packed full of. Its fun to pick abilities that work together to make powerful characters, but its not fun to cherry pick from among 14 suppliments to make the ubercharacter. As DM I can handle it pretty well, but have seen many other campaigns get ruined by it. A mix group can have trouble when an experienced player knows how to make overwhelmingly strong characters and the inexperienced players don't. Thats my only real problem with the rules system besides one specific skill "concentration" and how it applies to combat casting.
The only other downer with the 3.5 system is WotC's lack of support for adventures. In general 95% of the adventures made by other companies are terrible. WotC has made some stinkers, but over all they are better than the competition in this area. Its something I find frustrating as I get older and have less and less time to work on my campaign. | |
Looking for someone to cosponser a midwest DDM event. let me know if your interested!
Check out my brand new blog:
http://bshugg.blogspot.com | |
|
Count Dooku
Commander
4636 Posts
New York
| | 05/12/2005 9:10 AM |
| quote:
what i miss most, honestly, were character "kits" and "specialty priests"
They still exist...they are called Prestige Classses. Are they really that much different from Kits? (I never used them in 2nd Ed)
I have to agree with IanB's statement that there are less rules in 3rd edition. Theres alot of rules for every thing you do in 3rd..but they all use the same mechanic of trying to roll high to beat a DC or AC.
1st and 2nd had very different mechanics for many different tasks. | |
Champion of the Skulk
Vindicated Champion of the Twig Blight | |
|
2004 D&D Miniatures Champion
Kiddoc
Underboss
1797 Posts
| | 05/12/2005 9:15 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by bshugg
the 3.x books have breathed new life in to the DnD game system. Players are crawling out of the woodwork to play around my area. I love how easy it is for new players to pick up, and how you can custom make your characters with feats, skills and a balanced multiclassing system. If handled properly even prestige classes can be cool. Handled properly meaning used sparingly as rewards for in game play.
Now for the problems. Well, I love the rules and game system, but hate the 340238408328 different feats,spells and prestige classes that every new product seems to be packed full of. Its fun to pick abilities that work together to make powerful characters, but its not fun to cherry pick from among 14 suppliments to make the ubercharacter. As DM I can handle it pretty well, but have seen many other campaigns get ruined by it. A mix group can have trouble when an experienced player knows how to make overwhelmingly strong characters and the inexperienced players don't. Thats my only real problem with the rules system besides one specific skill "concentration" and how it applies to combat casting.
The only other downer with the 3.5 system is WotC's lack of support for adventures. In general 95% of the adventures made by other companies are terrible. WotC has made some stinkers, but over all they are better than the competition in this area. Its something I find frustrating as I get older and have less and less time to work on my campaign.
Brad, you know, that's a hell of a good point about adventures. I agree, it's the biggest loss in the transition to the newer game. Modules used to be fantastic, in fact, if you ask older players what they remember most from the product, they'll probably say it's a module. Many "old-timer" conversations revolve around these classics, yet what do we have now? They've hand-walked DM's through just about every other possible option, why stop short at modules and full-blown adventures.
As an aside, this market is ripe for the picking. Two very savvy (and good looking, I might add) gamers with writing skills could make a killing by releasing a good adventure or two with WoTC backing. You let me know when you're done writing the adventure, and I'll make the pitch to WoTC for you (I have several home addresses, I'm not above coercion uh... personal persuasion.), 50/50 split sound good? | |
POST DISCLAIMER: Above post may contain humor. Now with micro scrubbing bubbles. Do not operate heavy machinery. Take with food. Use only as directed. Contents may settle during shipping. No user-servicable parts inside. Void where prohibited. Beware of dog. This side up. Do not fold, spindle, or mutilate. No salt, MSG, or artificial coloring or flavoring added. Actual cash value of this post is 1/100th of a cent. Avoid contact with skin... | |
|
Hero of Skirmish
doubtofbuddha
Commander
3371 Posts
| | 05/12/2005 9:26 AM |
| Its kind of funny considering how involved in skirmishing I am, but I don't particularly like the d20 system in general for tabletop role-playing. As I get older I also notice not only a decrease in time for working on the mechanical fiddly bits but also a decrease in interest. I mean why do I want to spend the time to sit down and hunt through the rules manual to put together a proper character, make sure everything is balanced and then hope things are fun enough to make up for the time investment I put into it.
Thats why recently I have been leaning more towards preperation-light gaming systems, ones that won't take me upward of 20 minutes working on the mechanical parts of the character. Of late my interests have tended to lie with HeroQuest as it is pretty effective at mechanically representing a character while not requiring me to spend lots of time to create. You think about who the character is and what they can do, rather than selecting a menu of class, feat, and spell options.
| |
I am not gone. | |
|
The Great
Choco Monster
Ghendar
Warlord
11197 Posts
The Dark and Forbidding Lands of The Necromancer.
| | 05/12/2005 9:30 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Oni
Well to be fair my first game used minis. Just not in combat. When we would roll up new characters we would drive up to the nearest gaming store (about an hour away). We used them to show marching orders, and what not.
We would have used them for combat even, but we had very little money at the time. That was back in the late 80's early 90's.
My group did the same thing back in the 80's. Minis really helped the visual for the battle and always prevented any "misunderstandings" about who was where in the marching order when the fireball or lightning bolt went off. | |
Ghendar - Bringin' the snark!
Champion of the Spider Eater with rider.
I actually love to be swallowed. - Posted By gss_000 on 09/04/2007 2:32 PM
How many times in life do you get to eat your own Cthulhu? - Posted By Pedro on 03/31/2008 2:29 | |
|
sterling40
Sergeant
572 Posts
| | 05/12/2005 9:33 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Oni
quote:
Originally posted by sterling40
what i miss most, honestly, were character "kits" and "specialty priests"
you could adapt your character more to what you wanted it to do, just by using the rules from a splat book.
now a days, its all in feats and skills.
my all time favorite character was a specialty priest of Tempus, it was in the lines of a fighter/cleric/berzerker, but all in one class. Sure it had its drawbacks.
I loved the Noble Warrior kit for some odd reason [)]. Looking back the drawbacks seem worse than what I got, but boy it was fun Role-Playing it.
lol then you understand what i'm talking about. theres nothing like that (yet) for 3rd ed | |
Knight of Pixies
Champion of Mephits
"how many boards would the orc hoards hoard, if the orc hoards would hoard boards?"
| |
|
sterling40
Sergeant
572 Posts
| | 05/12/2005 9:36 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Testament
Sterling40, either you've got munchkins who are playing power-built clerics, they aren't roleplaying, or you've got a tiny pantheon. I find that different clerics can be wildly different, for starters, there's the two main archetypes:
Turn & Burn (Magic and turning)
Smite! (Combat based self-buffing fighter)
Throw in domain choice, feat selection and how they're played, and IME, clerics can be wildly different to one another.
i dont believe so, not to the extent that they could have been in second ed. books on top of books about clerics, and the gods of other races, and what have you, each could simply be taken as their god, or you could become a "specialty priest" look back at the "faiths and avitars" series, look up the speciualty priest of Elistraee, and tell me how you could get anywhere CLOSE to that in 3rd ed | |
Knight of Pixies
Champion of Mephits
"how many boards would the orc hoards hoard, if the orc hoards would hoard boards?"
| |
|
sterling40
Sergeant
572 Posts
| | 05/12/2005 9:39 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by MerricB
The "kit" of 2e has been replaced by the feats and skill choices you make.
Speciality Priests (apart from being another way to break 2e) can be approximated by some prestige classes (there were some very good ones in Dragon magazine a few years back), or by creating your own class - which is what they were, in any case.
The 2e system of spheres led to some terribly unbalanced priests.
Cheers!
it also led to excellent roleplaying. | |
Knight of Pixies
Champion of Mephits
"how many boards would the orc hoards hoard, if the orc hoards would hoard boards?"
| |
|