Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gothmog" data-source="post: 3995571" data-attributes="member: 317">Thats a really good summation of my frustrations with 3E as well.  In general, I preferred playing and running games under 2E- it was more freeform and flowed MUCH better for me and my group.  Now 3E did do a few things I did like- BAB and the new saves are great, and AC scaling upwards in response to BAB was fine.  THAC0 was never that hard of a concept for me and my groups to grasp, so it wasn't the bugaboo to us that it was to many groups.However, there are things that look good on the surface in 3E, but which turned into a nightmare in play.#1 The interconnectedness of everything in 3E- feats, skills, magic items, assumed power levels, monster CR ratings, experience gain for challenges, etc- the list is endless.  Basically, its very hard to houserule 3E without impacting some aspect of the core rules which has been codified and "balanced".  As long as you're playing with the assumptions 3E D&D is built with, it runs fine.  If you want to play at a lower magic level though, for example, you've got to basically rebuild the system from the ground up, which isn't worth the time.  There are just WAY too many assumptions in 3E about how you should be playing for it to be as flexible as previous versions of D&D.  In 2E, we played low magic games with no problem without having to revamp the entire system.  2E was a much more flexible and in many ways, robust system than 3E.#2 The complexity of the system.  I don't know how many times playing 3E things ground to a halt while we looked up rules.  While 3E has a rule for every situation, in a lot of ways that is a drawback to the system since it breaks the flow of the game to refer to the rules.  And for some reason, since the rule is there, people feel compelled to use the rule in question even though the situation might better be handled by something simpler or DM fiat.#3 Character/monster complexity.  Feats, skills, class powers, synergy bonuses, level-appropriate equipment, spell selection, GAH!  Statting up a vital NPC or new monster is a nightmare, as is advancing or adding templates to monsters.  I play RPGs to spend time playing the game, NOT to spend 3-4 hours before each session simply statting opponents up.  And god forbid something should come up on the fly for the DM, like if the PCs decide to attack the badass captain of the guard who is supposed to be a plot point, and the DM doesn't have stats ready since he didn't anticipate a confrontation.  I've seen games literally stop for 1 hour while the DM prepares for unforseen circumstances by statting up new foes.  When its that difficult to follow the rules of the system in order to play the game, there is a serious design flaw in the system.I guess in summary, 3E had some neat ideas, but poor execution.  Also, the overcodification of the system is a problem for me and my group, since it tends to restrict our options and playstyle instead of accomodating them.  A game that has the same features (character customization, high adventure, etc) 3E does without the complexity is Savage Worlds, so it can be done.  2E was superior to 3E in many ways, including flavor, worlds, and for my group, the performance of the system for our playstyle.  Ive gone back to playing 2E for my D&D needs, at least until 4th edition comes out.  I'm cautiously optomistic about 4th, but we'll see.</blockquote>

Verification