2E vs 3E: 8 Years Later. A new perspective?

[Aus_Snow]

Are you denying the fact that DM's are people and are subject to all the failities and weaknesses of humans? Peer acceptance, peer pressure, wanting to be accepted, and the actual fact that players may get up and leave? Cool, whatever.

The game, when played, is actually far bigger than that which is contained within the books. It includes social expectations and interactions between people far beyond mere "item acquisition".

No, I wasn't denying any of that. I kind of figured those basics of life in general wouldn't need to be mentioned in this (or any other) context. My mistake.

I am also fully aware that 'the game, when played, is actually far bigger than that which is contained within the books' and so forth. Again, that is so obvious, it needn't be said. I would hope.

 

[green slime]

No, I wasn't denying any of that. I kind of figured those basics of life in general wouldn't need to be mentioned in this (or any other) context. My mistake.

I am also fully aware that 'the game, when played, is actually far bigger than that which is contained within the books' and so forth. Again, that is so obvious, it needn't be said. I would hope.

Then why the equally "obvious" remark regarding a DM's "absolute" power? Apparently, its "obvious", it wasn't so "absolute",....

 

[Aus_Snow]

Then why the equally "obvious" remark regarding a DM's "absolute" power? Apparently, its "obvious", it wasn't so "absolute",....

The absolute power is there. That does not mean the DM should always wield it asbolutely, or consistently in only one way, etc.

But yeah, it's there. Nothing about 3e forbids any of that. Nothing about 2e (for instance) grants or increases any of that.

 

[Reynard]

But yeah, it's there. Nothing about 3e forbids any of that. Nothing about 2e (for instance) grants or increases any of that.

But yet, in the context of the original question, there it is: system based support for player created magic items in 3E vs no such thing in 2E. In 3E, a DM wanting to preserve the integrity of his "magic item economy" by not allowing PCs to make items is specifically saying "No." Previously, he is at best maintaining the status quo. And if you don't find it more difficult, time consuming and problematic to say "no" and explain why "no" is the right answer, either your players are far more compliant than any I have ever met before or you are cold hearted bastich.

 

[Aus_Snow]

And if you don't find it more difficult, time consuming and problematic to say "no" and explain why "no" is the right answer, either your players are far more compliant than any I have ever met before or you are cold hearted bastich.

They are apparently quite mature, in the scheme of things. Compliant, though? Ick. :\

 

[Reynard]

They are apparently quite mature, in the scheme of things. Compliant, though? Ick. :\

That too.

 

[green slime]

The absolute power is there. That does not mean the DM should always wield it asbolutely, or consistently in only one way, etc.

No it isn't. The power wielded by the DM is only there by consensus of the players, and, therefore, not absolute. The DM doesn't exist in a vaccuum. Playing a RPG by yourself seems pretty pointless...

 

[AllisterH]

wealth by level in 2E

Hmmm

Um, not to stoke more flames but there _WAS_ a default wealth by level in the 2E PHB. At least for the fighter class.

Look closely at the fighter followers.

At 9th level, a fighter automatically gained followers and you rolled on a table for the leader. The leader of those bodyguards was himself a fighter but just of a lower level and said fighter HAD magic items.

5th level fighter, plate mail and shield, battle axe +2
6th level fighter, plate mail and shield +1, spear +1, dagger+1
6th level fighter, plate mail +1, shield, spear +1, dagger +1 plus 3rd level fighter with splint mail, shield, crossbow of distance
7th level fighter, plate mail +1, shield +1, broadsword +2, heavy war horse with horseshoes of speed.

We always assumed this was the default for the minimum of what a fighter of a certain level had in permanent magic items and thus everybody in the party by a certain level had the equivalents (the wizard didn't have the magic weapons and armour but would have bracers and maybe a magical staff/wand)

 

[WayneLigon]

Previously, he is at best maintaining the status quo. And if you don't find it more difficult, time consuming and problematic to say "no" and explain why "no" is the right answer, either your players are far more compliant than any I have ever met before or you are cold hearted bastich.

If you're not meeting players that can understand reasoned, logical arguements as to why you want to construct your game in a certain way then you need to teach them why you do things the way you do OR find new players. If you explain in clear simple language what it is you wish to achieve with doing X, Y or Z that changes the basic rules or implied assumptions of the game, they should be able to see reason. If not, make them see reason.

Say 'no' and back it up. Say something like 'I feel that the magic item assumptions for 3E are out of line with the type and style of campaign I want to run. I realize that some areas of the game might take the assumption into account when creating CRs and I want you to know that I've taken a look at those areas and am aware of them; adjustments have been made where needed. The tone and style of the game is such that I want your own personal abilities to save the day, not your toys. I want the game to echo the moer classic fantasy of [give examples]. To this end, here are the guidelines I'm going by when I devise treasure etc etc etc'.

They may simply think you want to keep them from getting cool stuff through some perverse pleasure in denial; I've met lots of DMs that did indeed get pleasure from screwing over their players, as if it was an 'us vs them' game.

 

[Aus_Snow]

No it isn't. The power wielded by the DM is only there by consensus of the players, and, therefore, not absolute. The DM doesn't exist in a vaccuum. Playing a RPG by yourself seems pretty pointless...

Hm. Somewhere along the line, something got lost in translation. Not sure what, or how. Or when, even.

Maybe I haven't been very clear about something or other. If so, sorry. It wasn't a deliberate attempt to confuse anything, or anyone. Not even myself!

Anyway, I think I've said all I can - and perhaps should (?) - on that specific topic. So, if it's okay with you, I'll just bow out of it.