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.

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

ddaley

Explorer
The only version of D&D that I didn't care for was 4e. I remember liking 4e quite a bit while reading about it... thinking "this is cool." But, when it came to running it, there was just too much to keep track of. I was trying to run it for my kids who were fairly young at the time.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

GMMichael

Guide of Modos
Note from Morrus: This is the first article in a monthly column from WotC alumni Jonathan Tweet.

Here, here!

The 3E launch was definitely the most exciting D&D edition launch. The couple of years before that were the first launch that took place in the Internet era, and all the scoops and speculation were such fun. That magic was never recaptured — I suspect it could only happen once. The second and third time aren’t the same.
More fuel for my 3e reboot theory...

Folks bemoan THAC0 (and they will do so in reply to this comment) but I never had an issue with it. . .
Was 2E perfect? Nope.
Oh, gods! Not THAC0! That was horrible! SUBTRACTION? Argh!! ;)
2e wasn't perfect, but that didn't stop me from keeping a 2e monster manual for use in every game (including non-D&D) since. That was a worthy investment.
 

GreyLord

Legend
Thanks for all the comments. A few followups.

3.5: If you want me to talk about what led to 3.5, buy me a drink at a con. I don't think I'll be covering it in this column.

To-hit bonuses by AC: One way to tell whether a rule in AD&D was a good idea was to see whether other game designers copied it. Almost no one copied to-hit bonuses by armor. See also: percentile Strength scores, level limits for demihumans, different weapon damage by size of target (?!).

Dreamblade: I loved a lot of the minis we did, but creating that game as a painful and valuable lesson.

Buck Rogers: The first "d20" game, but when they published it they didn't tell D&D players that the stats were compatible. An early project by Mike Pondsmith!

Omega World: It has a special spot in my heart. I guess I'll cover it.

Ars Magica: Already written the post, just wait.

I still love Omega world. My favorite of the Gamma world types.
 

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)
Oh, gods! Not THAC0! That was horrible! SUBTRACTION? Argh!! ;)

It does have serious usabilty problems but, don't forget, it freed us up from using a look-up table to determine if an AC was hit or not. It was definitely an advancement, but the stronger usability enhancement was turning AC around altogether.
 

Greg K

Legend
Nobody I knew would use the complete books. They were completely unbalanced. Nobody I knew bought more than 2 of them before figuring out they weren't worth it. Local DMs shunned them.

It is always interesting to see people with different experiences. Where I am from, we used the Complete Fighter's Handbook, the Complete Thief's Handbook, The Complete Priest's Handbook, Complete Bard's Handbook, The Complete Druid's Handbook, The Complete Ranger's Handbook. Now, we did not, necessarily use everything from those books. The kits in the Fighter's Handbooks were ignored or altered on a kit by kit basis. The Bard kits were completely off limits as were most or all of the Ranger kits (the Greenwood Ranger was always forbidden). As for the Complete Priest's Handbook, that was always limited, primarily, to being a DM tool for campaign building.
 


Greg K

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.

I didn't like weapons reduced to Simple and Martial Weapons categories. I preferred the weapon groups from 2e (from Complete Fighter's Handbook, iirc) and 3e's Unearthed Arcana. However, I don't want to see AD&D "to hit" modifiers return. Even Gary didn't use the one's that he included in AD&D 1e. On the other hand, I am for differentiation of weapons by giving them different properties such as has been done in EN5ider and various other third party products.
 

StevenOs

First Post
I remember thinking AD&D was certainly good enough and not wanting to go into 3e. What really changed my mind when when Dungeon Magazine made the switch in systems so I needed the new system if I wanted to continue to get the most out of my subscription. When DnD moved from 3.5 to 4e that same thing did NOT happen and with it my pursuit of DnD mostly ended although I have recently picked up some 5e again.
 

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).

Now, this is some interesting and totally unexpected piece of history! I still think Spellfire is awful, but that's just me, I guess.
 

Tony Vargas

Legend
I liked the rationalizations they did in 3e, like with the armor class and the saving throws, but it all came apart for me when I attempted to play it and realized the combat system as written was a board game.
Thank you for having the courtesy to specify that it was only the combat system that was a boardgame-like, rather than calling the whole TTRPG 'a board game' as so many people seem to shortcut to doing.

But, to be fair, most of the grid-enabled range/area, movement/positioning innovations in 3e were built on 2e's C&T, and most of those were trying to make the wargame-like combat system of the earlier TSR era easier to use.

(Or maybe that was your point. Old-school wargamers could get snippy about games that used a mere folding paper map and cardboard chits rather than a proper sandtable with terrain features and miniatures.)

That, and some oddities like civilian NPCs with levels. The merchant giving you a mission at first level got 80 hp because he's a high level merchant. o_O
Hey, adventurers wander around a dangerous world, fighting monsters, and they gain levels. A merchant transporting goods around a dangerous world is going to have to fight monsters, and bandits, and adventurers if he doesn't hire them to be his stereotypical caravan guards (and maybe even if he does).
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top