Take the GM out of the Equation- A 3e design philosophy

[Ron]

renair is a god. No one question his decisions.
In 1E I WAS A GOD! Until the mortals I dm for learn power wedige, we not picking you up for the game (sucks when a god needs a ride), head lock feat, Ear thump feat etc.

When playing with adults, the DM would make some calls not covered by the rules or in odd with them, as sometimes they are stupid and need to be bended. We don't spend our time in endless debates about the DM ruling because we have more stuff to do. If the DM became too arbritary or his calls too much off the point, he's just retired as people will not go to his games anymore.

A real good DM can call whatever he wants, disregarding whatever is written in the rules, and the player will still enjoy the game and return to another session.

If Renair's players are satisfied with his calls and returning to an enjoyable play session, more power to him!

 

[Rel]

Since this thread is all about how much power should be in the hands of the DM, I'm gonna exercise mine and make a new rule right here and now. This is going to be the single biggest rule in the game, superceding all other rules. It is gonna' be so damn important that it even overrides Rule 0! I'll call it "Rule -1" and it goes like this:

Rule -1: IF YOU DON'T LIKE THIS EDITION OF THE GAME THEN PLAY ANOTHER ONE!

Jeebus, people! I know that the boards are here to discuss stuff like this and the "Edition Wars" are all part of the territory. But seriously, this is kind of ridiculous don't you think? If you've got a couple problems with 3E like you don't like a few spells or the way that grappling works and so forth, fine. If you think that the absolute core of the game runs counter to everything you hold dear about GMing then DON'T PLAY IT.

I know. I can hear the cries already, "But it's impossible to find players who will play anything but 3E! I HAVE to play it if I want to play!" Well then either figure out a way to make changes to the system to make it work for you and post them here so that others in your situation can use them or just do your best to find aspects of the game that you DO like. But all this, "I long for the halcyon days of yesteryear when I was young and in love and roleplaying was pure and rules-lawyers didn't exist..." is just tiresome. Even if it's true it is doing no good at all do vent about it here.

If previous editions of the game were better for you then go play them. Nobody is going to stop and if you stop telling folks here that they're having badwrongfun with 3E then they won't berate you about it either. If it is hard to find players then you'll have to try harder and it might take longer. But it will still be better than playing a game you don't like (or worse yet, running a game you don't like).

 

[Nisarg]

Ah, not just a crap DM, but a self-sacrificing one too. Truly, you are the salt of the earth.

I love how Hong gets away with these kinds of posts on a regular basis, when if I wrote the exact same thing I'd be banned in 3.1 minutes flat.

Nisarg

 

[diaglo]

If previous editions of the game were better for you then go play them.

took me 7 years. but patience is a virtue.

i finally found enough players.

and i'm running an OD&D campaign again.

you are free to join if you'd like. see the gamers seeking gamers forum for directions and such.

 

[Faraer]

Right now I'm not playing any d20 game, though I've run D&D and would happily play it again, as the ruleset is not the sole or necessarily a major determinant of campaigns.

I understand Rel's feeling. On a tightly focused forum it would be simply off-topic to start advocating something at odds with the forum's basis, such as preaching one campaign setting to users of another.

This forum is d20-oriented, but it's also a D&D forum, and the general D&D culture is much wider than the current D&D rules. It would be no gain to exclude from discussion everyone whose game wants and rules-design inclinations weren't the same as the current D&D's. As long as no one is saying simply 'This game sucks' or '3E players are stupid', we can only benefit by open discourse and questioning of assumptions -- and simply making those assumptions clear. Of course, the discourse is often not as open as it might be. It doesn't help for Rel to invoke that tired rhetoric of tarring likers of AD&D as nostalgists.

 

[S'mon]

I love how Hong gets away with these kinds of posts on a regular basis, when if I wrote the exact same thing I'd be banned in 3.1 minutes flat.

Nisarg

Hong has script immunity. You can't kill off the continuing characters.

 

[Henry]

I love how Hong gets away with these kinds of posts on a regular basis, when if I wrote the exact same thing I'd be banned in 3.1 minutes flat.

Nisarg

Hong has the luck of posting when I'm not on the forums, somewhere in the middle coming to an understanding with the person he's intentionally baiting, then round-aboutly apologizing for it later. :\

But I can say that this thread has very much run its course, and has seemed to dissolve into combinations of circular arguments and personal shots. I'll suggest Rel's idea: Maybe it's more helpful if those who don't like 3E's approach to rules either find another game, or experiment with changes to it to their satisfaction and suggest same to others.

Then again, it's also helpful when those who like things just as they are don't go baiting others with contrary arguments for its own sake.

Thread closed.