Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Geron Raveneye" data-source="post: 3995016" data-attributes="member: 2268">To answer the original question, I think 3E is a mixed bag when compared to 2E. I like the saving throws (they are more intuitive than the original set), the standardized system for problem resolution (I never had problems with the diverse subsystems in 2E, but I believe from what I read on various forums that many people prefer only having to add numbers), the feats (back when there was only the PHB, and the Feat Explosion hadn't happened yet) and the idea of Prestige Classes.What I miss from 2E was definitely Specialty Priests with their Spheres of Influence. Having individualized spell lists enabled me to allow priests spontaneous casting, since they couldn't call down divine doom on their enemies on a whim if it wasn't on their list in the first place.I also miss the independence of the individual subsystems from each other. 3E interconnected a LOT of the stuff, so if you yank Attacks of Opportunity (for example), you don't just have to check the Combat Section for alterations, but also the Feats, the Classes (for probable class ability obsoleteness) and if you're unlucky enough even the spells/special abilities.There's more on both sides, this is just meant to demonstrate that both versions had a lot of good and a lot of bad going for them. What I can't understand (as usual) is that any discussion of different versions of D&amp;D/AD&amp;D turns sour after a while. It's like people desperately NEED to fence themselves in and declare their area the BEST, even though we ALL are fenced in on the &quot;RPG geek&quot; corral already.&nbsp; :\</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Geron Raveneye, post: 3995016, member: 2268"] To answer the original question, I think 3E is a mixed bag when compared to 2E. I like the saving throws (they are more intuitive than the original set), the standardized system for problem resolution (I never had problems with the diverse subsystems in 2E, but I believe from what I read on various forums that many people prefer only having to add numbers), the feats (back when there was only the PHB, and the Feat Explosion hadn't happened yet) and the idea of Prestige Classes. What I miss from 2E was definitely Specialty Priests with their Spheres of Influence. Having individualized spell lists enabled me to allow priests spontaneous casting, since they couldn't call down divine doom on their enemies on a whim if it wasn't on their list in the first place. I also miss the independence of the individual subsystems from each other. 3E interconnected a LOT of the stuff, so if you yank Attacks of Opportunity (for example), you don't just have to check the Combat Section for alterations, but also the Feats, the Classes (for probable class ability obsoleteness) and if you're unlucky enough even the spells/special abilities. There's more on both sides, this is just meant to demonstrate that both versions had a lot of good and a lot of bad going for them. What I can't understand (as usual) is that any discussion of different versions of D&D/AD&D turns sour after a while. It's like people desperately NEED to fence themselves in and declare their area the BEST, even though we ALL are fenced in on the "RPG geek" corral already. :\ [/QUOTE]

Verification