The Real problem with 3e D&D

EyeontheMountain

First Post
Hussar said:
Well, that comes with experience. I wouldn't expect a person new to chess to make an optimal move every time, so I certainly don't expect it from new players. The problem I think here, is that you are assuming that if the players don't make the exact perfect choice every time, they are going to get hosed..

That depends totally on the DM. Though I suppose the other players can make it rough also. Teh problem I see is that D&D is moving more and more to a rookie/expert dichotemy, where the two have little room to meet in the middle.

And that is not good. Too steep of a learning curve.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Imaro

Legend
EyeontheMountain said:
That depends totally on the DM. Though I suppose the other players can make it rough also. Teh problem I see is that D&D is moving more and more to a rookie/expert dichotemy, where the two have little room to meet in the middle.

And that is not good. Too steep of a learning curve.

I totally agree with this statement. And also want to add that the learning curve for D&D is (IMHO) harder for new players to grasp. Even with just knowing their feats, skills, class abilities, magical items, racial abilities, etc....they then need to know about different combat maneuvers(disarm, charging, full attacks etc.) as well as AoO, reach, movement rules, types of actions,etc.

For most new people, that I have tried to introduce to D&D 3.x specifically, this is just too much(for a game that's suppose to be fun) and it's increased when they play with someone more experienced who understands and can implement all of these rules. I think D&D is becoming more of a game for those with the time and inclination to master alot of rules and I don't know if that's necessarily a good thing. Chess is more complex than checkers, but more people play checkers.

For me most (non-competitive)games should be fun and easy to grasp, especially something like a roleplaying game where you are bound to have more than two people and their rules knowledge, ability to remember and grasp tactics, etc. may not be the same.
 

Delta

First Post
Imaro said:
For most new people, that I have tried to introduce to D&D 3.x specifically, this is just too much(for a game that's suppose to be fun) and it's increased when they play with someone more experienced who understands and can implement all of these rules.

QFT. (And all the rest of your post.)
 

Reynard

Legend
Imaro said:
On another note, how do you prep tactics? PC's come up with some crazy stuff so am I suppose to try to plan for everything?

I am not sure how to even answer this, because I don't know how you even begin to prepare an adventure without an eye toward the tactics of the opposition.

That's cool but what about players that are new to the game? It's not just knowing what an ability or spell can do( and I really don't see how you could have every spell memorized), but picking the right one and applying it to the situation in the way that is most optimal. As the choices grow this takes longer and longer.

They do what they have been doing since the game was conceived -- they learn from more experienced players, or they learn as they go if agroup all discovered the game at the same level of familiarity.

D&D is complex -- it just isn't too complex IMO. It has a lot of depth and breadth to it and new books mean new rules and things to learn and master. This is a good thing, IMO. YMMV, and apparently does.

"make a photocopy and buy a highlighter" some people just want to play a game and have fun.

If they can't be satisfied with playing something striaght forward like a fighter or rogue, they would probably prefer a different game.
 

danzig138

Explorer
Pants said:
why spend the time bitching about games that aren't your cup-o-tea?
Aside from porn, isn't that the entire point of the internet? :)

As for myself. . . I think if it's too much for some people, well, that sucks for them. For my group, we use character sheets that have slots for a lot of the bonus types (dodge, insight, luck, etc) ready to be filled in. For other bonuses, we use this wicked cool technology that I discovered called the Scratch Sheet. It's not available in all areas - just the ones that sell dead trees. ;)

If someone plays a barbarian, I expect them to have notes with recalculated stats on it. if someone plays a cleric who uses a lot of buff spells, then I expect them to have notes with these things on them. This isn't new to 3rd edition either. I expected the same kind of preparation for 2e, Shadowrun, RIFTS, and every other game I've run. I did the same things for every game I played. Honestly, if that is too much work for someone. . . well, there's always TWERPS.
 

danzig138 said:
If someone plays a barbarian, I expect them to have notes with recalculated stats on it.
Our barbarian has 4 combat sheets: normal, raging, hasted and raging while hasted. Saves a lot of time, as long as he's reading the correct sheet. :)
 

The Levitator

First Post
I've been running a 3.5 group for the last 4 years, and I've played briefly in 3 others as a player in that time. The one observation I've made is that there seems to be a big trend in starting with uber-characters. I joined a group that started at 10th level. They had some pretty interesting builds that would have been a lot more fun if they would have had a clue how to run those characters. I just don't see the same problems in groups that start at 1st level and actually grow with their characters. I'm sure there are many capable gamers that can roll up a 15th level character on the spot and remember every single capability of that character, but they are certainly not in the majority in our area.

The only problem I've ever had with 3e D&D is playing with players who don't know the rules and don't actually progress their characters. That seems to slow games down more than anything in the groups I've participated in. It seems that many younger players want to be invincible from the first encounter, and lack the patience to develop a character and build his power over time. And that's coming from someone with bipolar disorder AND ADHD! :p Maybe it's the side effect of the video game generation and our world's increasing desire for instant gratification. But I've never been in a normally starting, normally progressing gaming group in any system that felt utterly broken.

I don't think a majority of the problems people complain about lie in the systems, but rather with the players playing those systems. A lot of people say this system is broken and that system is broken, yet there are people playing those systems and having a ball. {In my best Louis Black voice} "People are like snowflakes........" There are many systems because there are many different types of people who have many different ideas of what a roleplaying game should play like. Find the system that suits your playstyle, and a group of people you'd actually hang out with outside of the gaming table, and the rest is cake. :D
 
Last edited:

Imaro

Legend
danzig138 said:
If someone plays a barbarian, I expect them to have notes with recalculated stats on it. if someone plays a cleric who uses a lot of buff spells, then I expect them to have notes with these things on them. This isn't new to 3rd edition either. I expected the same kind of preparation for 2e, Shadowrun, RIFTS, and every other game I've run. I did the same things for every game I played. Honestly, if that is too much work for someone. . . well, there's always TWERPS.

Um...Yeah that sounds more like a college course than a fun game to me. ;)
And I think I'll go with C&C over TWERPS
 

3d6

Explorer
I feel like the recombinance problem could be solved pretty easily in a new edition.

A lot of buffing effects are much more complicated than they need to be. As has been mentioned, barbarian rage is a good example of this. Rage primarily gives a bonus on attacks and damage, as well as hit points and Fortitude saves. However, it also give incidental bonuses to a large number of other things which are not particularly important in the context of a short-duration combat buff. Rage could be changed so that it gave a +2 bonus to attack and damage rolls and temporary hit points equal to twice your barbarian level. The primary effect of barbarian rage would remain, but the changes that need to be made to your character when you used it would be simpler.

Another factor making buffing effects more complicated is the bonus stacking rules. The game would be much simpler if there were stacking rules inside a class of effects, but different classes of effects always stacked. Here's what I mean. Lets say I have a normal array of defensive magical items, and I have protection from evil cast on me. I need to check to see if I have any resistance bonuses to saves or deflection bonuses to AC from my items to see what effect (if any) protection from evil has on those statistics.

I would make two major changes to this system. First, I would reduce the number of bonus types. Many bonus types are so uncommon (such as sacred or luck) that they essentially stack with everything. I would convert all bonuses of these types into unnamed bonuses. This would leave me with armor, shield, natural armor, dodge, resistance, deflection, and enhancement bonuses (there would be a design rule stating that no new bonus types are to be added in rules expansions as well). Second, I would change the rules so that stacking rules only apply within their own class of effects. For example, two magical items providing a deflection bonus to AC would not stack, as they are both magical items. However, a magical item and a spell providing a deflection bonus would stack, as they are different classes of effect (magical item and spell). This would mean that you would only need to check magic item stacking when you change your magic items, not every time a spell was cast upon you, and you would only need to check spell stacking when you had more than one spell effect in place.

The final problem is short-duration buffs require more bookkeeping than seems needed. I would change the duration of short-duration buffing effects (loosely defined as buffing effects with a duration of less than 10 minutes/level) into subjective durations, such as "1 encounter" or "1 combat". That way, the primary balancing factor of short-duration buffing spells (the actions lost in combat) would be maintained, but the need for tracking very short durations such as 3 or 5 rounds would no longer exist.

Another option would be to eliminate stacking rules, give linear costs for magic items bonuses (instead of exponential costs), and make sure all combat buffs only last for 1 combat.

Finally, there needs to be a free, web-based utility for adding templates and HD to monsters.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top