Differences in powergaming in 1st/2nd and 3.0/3.5

[Sadrik]

The differences in powergaming in 1st and 2nd edition vs 3.x is:
Characters were not built like they are now. A powerful character in 1st and 2nd might have been a multi-classed or dual-classed character. But both multi-classing and dual-classing had some pretty serious restrictions. Really, the major factor on powergaming then was magic items. And that was almost solely controlled by the DM. They were able to allow certain items in the game by giving them to the players. There were no feats and practically no skills (I suppose you could call the 2nd edition proficiency system a skill system). So the powers outside of spellcasters were based completely off of the items that they had access too. And again their flow was based on the DM. The DM was encouraged (had) to handwave in these games because the game had inherent flaws. Everything in first and second edition seemed to be primarily written fundamentally with flavor before mechanics. I mean look at all the settings and things created then. It was wonderful. If the mechanics didnt work (which they often had problems), it was expected that the DM would handwave, shoe horn, house rule, disallow, or simply alter it. I could give a million examples.

3.x is completely different. The players have much more control of their abilities, skills, feats, and the their class and prestige class progression they want and even magic items purchased with the wealth rules. The power of the game is tilted too much in the players court. There is an inherent level of planning that has to go into characters to meet PrC, feat, and other requirements. Additionally, everything is spelled out in 3.x. And I mean everything. So, it gives a lot of firepower to the rules lawyer at the table. Handwaving only works when everyone at the table has no idea what to do or where to look. Handwaving in my group is very minimalist because we/(me) are very rules proficient. How far can I jump to the foot, page x; How much damage does a tarrask cause when it falls on you, page x (check this one, by the way, its funny how many 1,000s of dice of damage this causes). Everything is spelled out for mechanics sake and not for flavor.

Being someone who has played every edition extensively I do want for the old days of making a 10th level fighter in 10 minutes and then asking the DM, what magic items I can have and be done with it. I am road weary designing characters and looking at the myriad of options available. And what makes that 10th level fighter different from every other 10th level fighter? His stats, his magic items and how I roleplay him. And imo that last one is the key. The stats are random, the gm controls the magic items and I as a player control how I role play. Simple- elegant and it offers the DM the luxury of controlling the campaign flow with out gearing for the effects of powergaming.

3.x did do a lot of wonderful things to the game it brought levels of customization that really did improve the game on several if not most levels. But it simply has too many moving parts, the illusion that it is attempting balance and having everything completely spelled out. The inherent flaws of 1st and 2nd edition were in some ways desirable to this. If D&D had a less spelled out less crunchy system that allowed some handwaving and DM fiat it would be much better game imo. As it is now powergaming, which did exist in 1st and 2nd, but is way out of proportional control. People who thought powergaming was a problem in 1st and 2nd... well dont look now.

 

[Shade]

I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum. Having always felt shoehorned by the rules and DM handwaving in 1E and 2E, I'm infatuated by the plethora of options for character creation and development in 3E.

As a DM, I love the degree of control I have over a wide variety of enemy options, all backed up by concise rules, and not having to rely on arbitrary handwaving that can lead to inconsistency and favoritism.

 

[Torment]

I do prefer the older school of playing. I am not a rule lawyer. I think my players are aware of that, and I'm definitly aware of that. I rarely get into rules argument however because in most cases i'll just think to myself "well, i could lose flow and ask the players or check in one of the books, or just make it up on the fly whether or not it makes sense for a hero to be doing such and such action". In most cases, I want to keep the flow of the game as much as possible.

 

[Shroomy]

I have to agree with Shade here as I'm an options man. Though, I'm still not sure what this has to do with the differences in powergaming between editions as the OP didn't really compare the methods of powergaming in earlier editions.

 

[Dragonhelm]

I think it's the person, and not the system, that breaks the game. It doesn't matter if you're playing 1e, 2e, 3e, Shadowrun, GURPS, or what have you. Powergamers will take the tools at their disposal, and try to get away with murder.

Maybe certain rules are more prone to powergaming problems, but a lot of that depends on the players and on the DM. I played in an AD&D game years ago where one player tried to demonstrate how his character could throw 64 shuriken in a round. This guy was a manipulator and could put some hefty pressure on a person, and the DM gave in. It backfired when another character tried to do the same thing, fumbled, and threw the shuriken into all of our backs. lol

At the same time, I've also been in an AD&D game where the DM gave us all an extra ability, yet he balanced that out by pounding the hell out of us. Point is, the DM had a strong control and didn't let our abilities get out of hand. In many ways, it is the DM that determines how much a powergamer will abuse a system.

Sadrik, have you looked into Castles & Crusades? It's got a lot of that old school feel and lets DMs have a certain amount of control, while also incorporating many of the improvements of 3e. It may be what you're looking for.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

The differences in powergaming in 1st and 2nd edition vs 3.x is:
Characters were not built like they are now. A powerful character in 1st and 2nd might have been a multi-classed or dual-classed character. But both multi-classing and dual-classing had some pretty serious restrictions.

What what? People played humans in 1st edition? When? Why be a mage, when you could be a cleric mage, with more HP, better saves, healing spells, etc. All for the measly cost of being (on average) 1 level lower. Multiclassing was blatently the way to go, and in the vast majority of games (ie ones that didnt exceed the level limit), there was no contest. Humans were for chumps.

 

[Crothian]

As it is now powergaming, which did exist in 1st and 2nd, but is way out of proportional control. People who thought powergaming was a problem in 1st and 2nd... well dont look now.

Powergaming isn't a problem now though. Some people do it, but it is as it has always been asn easy problem to fix: just say no to certain things or don't play with people that power game more then you want.

 

[Jawar]

I think it's the person, and not the system, that breaks the game.

Agree.
Still, it's not my fault :\
It's some of the other players that sometimes favor flavor a bit too much. And then, someone has to have some way of gettting things done.
(Shackled City has not been easy on us... but my cleric has already given Holy Weapons to every trooper in the group and with Divine Metamagic / Persistent Spell he's up to the job! )

Anyhow, that would have been impossible with OD&D, so I guess that answers the question...

 

[molonel]

If I see any great divides between the editions, I see a difference between 1st Edition and Basic D&D prior to the release of the original Unearthed Arcana and Oriental Adventures.

I do NOT see 1st and 2nd Edition standing against 3rd Edition. I see 2nd and 3rd Edition standing in contrast to early 1st Edition, and the realease of those two books I just mentioned paved the way.

I see 3rd Edition starting to make some of the mistakes that killed 2nd Edition: rules creep, options out the wazoo. I like options more than most people, but come on. Almost 1,000 prestige classes in WotC published materials? Yikes.

 

[Drowbane]

1e: was a fairly innocent age of gaming for me. I knew how to make characters without needing to use the phb, and which dice to roll in combat... and thats about the extent of my rules knowledge back then.

2e: started out fairly simple and just snowballed (much like 3e has). Anybody who says this wasn't an age of powergaming clearly didn't have access to much past the core books. a decade later I still (somewhat) remember how to make a character with a 8/1 attack rate. And after that I could start the powergaming.