D&D 3E/3.5 Jonathan Tweet: Prologue to Third Edition

The story of Third Edition D&D starts, perhaps, with Peter Adkison reading 2nd Edition AD&D (1989) and being sorely disappointed. For one thing, he felt the new system left several underlying problems in place, so players didn’t get much benefit from the effort it took to switch to a new system. For another, 2nd Ed stripped away all the charm and character of 1st Ed. No more half-orcs, arcane sigils, monks, or assassins. Demons and devils were renamed to avoid the ire of superstitious parents. The new AD&D was tamed and genericized.

The story of Third Edition D&D starts, perhaps, with Peter Adkison reading 2nd Edition AD&D (1989) and being sorely disappointed. For one thing, he felt the new system left several underlying problems in place, so players didn’t get much benefit from the effort it took to switch to a new system. For another, 2nd Ed stripped away all the charm and character of 1st Ed. No more half-orcs, arcane sigils, monks, or assassins. Demons and devils were renamed to avoid the ire of superstitious parents. The new AD&D was tamed and genericized.

116618.jpg


Peter wasn’t the only one to dislike 2nd Ed. When it came time for Mark Rein•Hagen and me to release a “second edition” of Ars Magica, our collaborator Lisa Stevens warned us that there was a great deal of hostility around that word at the time. She was involved in TSR’s RPGA program of organized play for AD&D, and the members were unhappy with the changes. As for me, I had stopped running AD&D round 1979, switching to RuneQuest and then a home-brew hack instead. D&D seemed to be behind the times, it was interesting to see TSR stumble with their 2nd Edition.


Note from Morrus: This is the first article in a monthly column from WotC alumni Jonathan Tweet. You'll know him from Ars Magica, for being the lead designer on D&D 3rd Edition, and for co-designing 13th Age, amongst many other things. Upcoming articles include My Life with the Open Gaming License, and Origins of Ars Magica. Let us know in the comments what stories and topics you'd like to hear from Jonathan! Also, don't miss Jim Ward's excellent column!


TSR’s goal in creating a generic version of AD&D was to allow an endless number of settings that could use the same basic rules system. For 2nd Edition, TSR released Forgotten Realms, Maztica, Al-Qadim, Spelljammer, Planescape, Dark Sun, Ravenloft, Masque of the Red Death, Dragonlance, and Greyhawk, not to mention one-offs like Jakandor. All these incompatible AD&D lines split the market so that each line sold less and less. How did things go off-track? At TSR, the people who did the creative work did not coordinate with the people who did the business planning, and the owner of the company was an heiress, not a gamer. From outside, some of us could tell that the business model was a big problem. At Wizards in 1994, we reviewed a science fiction RPG for possible acquisition, and it featured an AD&D-style business model of one ruleset and many worlds. I said no way because that model would be a huge negative. TSR managed to hide how bad things were for years—until it all came apart in 1997. When TSR couldn’t pay its bills, Wizards of the Coast bought them out.

In 1995, two years before the acquisition of D&D, Wizards cut all its roleplaying game lines. I moved off the defunct “Alter Ego Games” team and started working on card games. Magic: The Gathering and Netrunner are two of my favorite games, and I got to work on both of them. One bright side to roleplaying lines being cut, my boss pointed out, was that I could now do my own roleplaying design on the side and it would not be considered competition. So it was that in 1997 I was working on a faux-Greek-myth RPG, inspired in part by Xena: Warrior Princess. The idea was that the gods were all oppressive jerks, and the player-characters were all rebel demigods, the half-mortal children of the bullies they’re fighting. Half-gods as player-characters seem like a good niche—powerful enough to feel formidable, aligned with the common people against the elites, connected to a recognizable deity such as Ares or Zeus, and hailed as heroes while being outsiders to everyday life. But before I got anything up and running, Wizards bought D&D and the game of Greek half-gods got shelved.

After acquiring D&D, Peter Adkison traveled around talking to AD&D players, especially RPGA players. He would ask whether they would like to see a new edition, and they all said the same thing. They did not want a Third Edition. Then he would ask what changes they might like to see if there were a Third Edition. In response, the fans talked at length about all the problems with Second Edition and what a better rule set would look like. The fans didn’t want a Third Edition, but they needed one.

We knew that the game needed a major overhaul, and we knew that players didn’t want a Third Edition. We explicitly discussed the prospect of losing players with this new edition. We figured that even if we lost 10% of our players up front, the benefits of a better game system would accrue year by year and eventually would be glad we did the Third Edition. In 1999, however, Ryan Dancey started rolling out publicity for Third Edition. He did such a good job month by month that we could see the enthusiasm build. By the time Third Ed released, we knew we had a major hit on our hands, and all thought of losing players in the short term was forgotten.

The first work I did with the new D&D system was for an unpublished project, a roleplaying game set in the world of Magic: The Gathering and using streamlined rules derived from the AD&D rules. We experimented with ways to use cards, such as putting monster stats on cards and constructing random encounters by selecting from random draws. In one version it was a board game where the characters turned off mana nodes as they pressed deeper into the dungeon, one raid at a time. In another version, it was a light RPG with D&D-style rules set in the world of Dominia. I gave characters three types of saving throws and made Armor Class the target number for your attack roll. Other game designers had independently come up with these same common-sense ideas. My work on these games turned out to be good practice for later when I ended up on the 3rd Edition design team.

The rule I really liked from the Dominia RPG was that the characters had to stick it out exploring the dungeon until they had accumulated a minimum amount of treasure. If they retreated to town to heal up before reaching the treasure milestone, they were penalized XP. Years later at Wizards, I would experiment with similar milestone rules for random dungeon crawls, another experimental design that never got published. 13th Age has a similar rule based on battles rather than treasure: the group suffers a “campaign loss” if they take a full heal-up before they have defeated a minimum force of enemies.

Gradually my involvement with the new D&D edition grew, from working on a parallel project to being assigned the beginner version, to landing on the design team itself and then finally getting assigned the lead role.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Jonathan Tweet

Jonathan Tweet

D&D 3E, Over the Edge, Everway, Ars Magica, Omega World, Grandmother Fish

collin

Explorer
2e lost me with the proliferation of Complete _______ books, settings I had no interest in, and the _____ Option books. It just bloated and drifted, I guess.
But, I had been a fan of Champions! for years and I was well into Storyteller, by then. 3e brought me back to D&D, but I wasn't about to leave the TTRPG hobby.

3e also shook up the hobby. It put D&D back in the industry-leader position, not just in sales but in head-space. Everyone jumped on the d20 bandwagon, rival systems & companies died on the vine.

I had also been a big Champions fan (1st and 2nd edition) from high school into early college, but that faded over time. Some years ago, our gaming group decided to run Champions again. We chose 5th edition. It was a blast getting to toss cars and leap tall buildings once again. We also ran a brief Twilight:2000 game after that. And I also became highly motivated to take up miniature painting, which I still do to this day. All of this was spurred by what WotC did for D&D and the RPG community as a whole by releasing 3rd edition. Like I said, had that not come along, I am not sure exactly what my passion or hobby would be these days.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

cbwjm

Seb-wejem
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one that liked the names Tanar'ri and Baatezu. Having started with basic D&D and moved into 2e, I missed out on 1e. I've since had a look at the rule books and I generally feel like I dodged a bullet, they just seemed to be a mess. Wasn't a lot of 2e about backwards compatability? I think I recall reading something in Dragon that TSR would have preferred to move away from Thac0 to an ascending attack roll but because they wanted the transition to be as smooth as possible they kept it. I could be miss-recalling it though, for all I know it was someone writing about 3e saying how they wished 2e had made the change.
 

There you had a game company that was: overproducing collectible dice that nobody asked for, insisting with a bad TCG, publishing five different flavors of Tolkienesque fantasy (FR, DL, GH, Mystara, and Birthright), ordering new print runs of products that were still widely available on the shelves, and spending a lot of money on bad litigation. Those are just from the top of my mind.

Somehow, in the middle of all of that, people still appear sure that having a planar setting, a gothic horror setting, an apocalyptic setting, and eventually publishing offbeat experiments like Council of Wyrms or Jakandor, was the reason why TSR failed. I've never seen anyone say that White Wolf failed because they created their own competition by also publishing Werewolf: the Apocalypse, Mage: the Ascension or Dark Ages versions of their popular lines.

In my opinion, 2e made D&D greater than it ever was by adding a depth that didn't exist before and will probably never exist again, because we can look at post-WotC D&D and see that experimenting with their game is not where they want to be these days. 4e was probably their last move through uncharted waters, and it didn't end up the way they wanted it to be.

They can keep repeating until 2050 that publishing innovative campaign settings that moved D&D in unique directions was the financial downfall of TSR. As long as this is presented as Adkinson's or Dancey's opinion, and not a detailed report from the likes of Deloitte or PwC, I'll just choose to believe something else... :)
 

osarusan

Explorer
Whoever made the call to simplify the weapon selection seriously blew it. AD&D's "to hit" adjustments made weapon selection more than simply looking for which weapon of a particular class did the most damage. That's something that ought to be revived

YES!! Absolutely 100% agree.

While I love a lot of the simplifications that have been put into D&D, some of them just really bug me. Simplification is good for streamlining play, but not at the expense of vital flavor. In 2e it really mattered what weapon you chose. There were benefits and penalties at certain times. I feel that since 3e it has became so simple to just crunch the numbers and get a "this is the only correct choice" kind of result. This goes both for weapons and armor, but also for feat choice, subclass choice, and even things like what animal you polymorph into. 3e+ D&D and Pathfinder were revolutionary, but so much of them has become a game of running the numbers and finding the actual best choice.

I feel like simplifying the monsters and the rules for DMs was great (I *love* the 5e Monster Manual), but in oversimplifying things on the players' end, they lost a lot of the flavor of the game.

That's why I prefer Hackmaster 5e to D&D these days. It may be a little over-crunchy at times, but it doesn't feel like you're competing with yourself to make the absolute "best" build for your character.
 

Greg K

Legend
The only complaints that I recall , initially, having had with the 2e changes was the renaming of demons and devils to pacify the complaints of right wing conservatives such as the self labeled "Moral Majority". I, personally, did not care about the removal of the Assassin class or half-orc.

I thought that the 2e PHB had some nice additions (e.g. Priest spheres, Priests of Specific Mythoi, Proficiencies in the PHB, Rangers and Thieves being able to allocate points). I also liked several of the early products including the Complete Fighter's Handbook (although the actual implementation of several kits had left me cold), the Complete Thief's Handbook, and, as a DM, the Complete Priest's Handbooks. I also liked several of the early settings including Al Qadim: Land of Fate, the original Dark Sun boxed set, and Ravenloft: Realms of Terror. The only early setting that I did not like was Spelljammer (and I was fine with it existing until official cannon was revised to force it upon Dark Sun and Ravenloft).

Now, around late 1992 early 1993, is when I started to develop issues with 2e. First, I disliked the 2e material being released. Between late 1992 to 1996, I still like a few of the releases including the HR Series, Complete Druid's Handbook, PO: Combat & Tactics, PO: Spells & Magic and a few Ravenloft supplements. After that period, there was nothing at all that I liked and Slavicsek had already ruined Dark Sun (in my opinion). Second, many of the AD&Disms that led me to nearly leave AD&D with 1e really started to grate on me around 1993. So after, walking out of a 2e Revised Dark Sun campaign, I left AD&D completely.

3.0, eventually, brought me back to D&D. While I disliked the art, there was a lot that I really liked about the 3.0 core rules and many of the changes found within were what I had wanted. My only major disappointments with the core books (beyond the art) were the cleric, the monk and the default setting feel with its smokesticks, sunrods, tanglefoot bags, halfling riding dogs, and exotic weapons (e.g., the urgosh and spiked chain). There was also the paltry number of skill points for several of the classes. and my disappointment with the the barbarianclass being a berserker rather than closer to both the 1e Barbarian (or better David Howery's revision from Dragon Magazine and 2e's Wilderness Warrior kit). Despite these issues and my finding WOTC's supplements unimpressive (which didn't change until the 3.5 Unearthed Arcana), the core rules impressed me enough to keep an eye on 3.0 until I, finally, jumped on board following Green Ronin's release of their Psychic, Shaman, and Witch Handbooks.

Part of why I was able to enjoy running 3.0 was Mr Tweet's discussion of the commoner standard in one of the Dragon Magazine 3.0 previews. Between that and Monte's DM's Best friend option in the DMG, I threw out almost all of the sample DC in the PHB and ran 3e skills closer to how it is done in 5.0. In my opinion, that discussion of the Commoner standard belonged in the DMG (much like Skip's information about the various monster types should have been in the DMG or MM rather than MMII).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

seankreynolds

Adventurer
There you had a game company that was: overproducing collectible dice that nobody asked for,

For the record, Dragon Dice was a very successful game. It sold 500,000 units, which is what the sales team anticipated. Unfortunately, the top level of the company insisted on making 1,000,000 units because they'd get a price break from the manufacturer if they made that many units. So half the print run was DOA, and the cost of that unsold product hurt the game line and the company.

insisting with a bad TCG,

I assume you're talking about SPELLFIRE, which also was a successful game. Not as successful as M:tG, of course, but successful enough that at one point Wizards actually planned on rereleasing it (although they never did).
 

Hussar

Legend
Heh, I was a late adopter for 3e. I had more than enough 2e stuff to keep me going for a long time. I wound up getting into 3e about a year before 3.5 hit, so, that certainly put a damper on my buying. I bought a ton of 3e stuff, but, when 3.5 came around, heck, I never even bought a DMG. I went from buying a book about a month or so, to buying maybe 1 per year in 3.5. I'm still at that rate now. :(
 

Staffan

Legend
Whoever made the call to simplify the weapon selection seriously blew it. AD&D's "to hit" adjustments made weapon selection more than simply looking for which weapon of a particular class did the most damage. That's something that ought to be revived.
Nah. Weapon vs armor type is too complex for D&D, and the simplified optional version from 2e (where armor types have different AC versus bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing weapons) does dumb things like put clubs on equal terms with warhammers or daggers on equal terms with picks. Also, many campaigns primarily pit the PCs against monsters, which don't wear armor and as such the whole thing becomes useless.

I prefer the direction they're going with weapons these days where weapons are balanced using more distinct weapon traits rather than an unwieldy table.
 

Zardnaar

Legend
2E would my edition of choice for gun pointed at head and you have to pick one edition for the rest of your life. Basically you won't get bored with all of the settings.
 

CapnZapp

Legend
The rule from Dominia targets the biggest rules hole still in D&D - that the players can always game the difficulty level by choosing more or less rests, essentially trivializing any challenge if they want to. They're given plenty tricks that negate every obstacle to resting except for one "you're running out of time".

Any DM dead tired of that trope (not to mention how time crunches in 99% of official modules are illusory, hoaxes essentially) are sold out of luck.

A rule that said "you can only rest every three encounters" or indeed you must loot at least X gold before retreating would instantly inject some real game challenge into D&D.

Not every group should feel compelled to use such a rule, but official modules should be stocked with monsters and other challenges with it in mind.

Oh well, maybe 6th edition. Or more likely, 9th.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top