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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Spell" data-source="post: 4001782" data-attributes="member: 19718">but, you see, that's the gist of the matter. everyone will undoubtely have their own specific point of view, and might not be aware that other people with whom they are discussing have a completely different set of assumptions.and, from your point of view, from you expectations at the game table, that is completely fair. but then you have to appreciate that other people might have different priorities.in my case: i wanted 3e to be still very much compatible with older editions. such was not the case (despite the designers claiming that the conversion work wouldn't have been too bad... i didn't like that kind of hype. anyway...).given that the system was quite different, i would have appreciated a lot if there still was leeway to run the game with the same attitude i had before. i am sorry, that is not the case in my experience. and, what's more, in other people's experience, too. it's not a universal thing, but you have to appreciate that there is a number of people that, for good or bad, say that 3e just plays differently in many many many ways.now, given that there are systems on the market in which i can pretty much ignore a subsystem and still play "by the book" without substantial headaches, i can't see why 3e wasn't designed that way. i don't see why, if 99% of the gamers like tactical complexities, i have to be stuck with that... especially when it was *not* the case in previous editions!!!so, in my view, 3e has the following GREAT flaws:1. not compatible with 25+ years of game material by TSR, Mayfair, Judges guild and other publishers (in u.s., u.k. or other nations).2. assumes that since the majority of the gamers plays in a certain way, everyone else will conform, or move to another system.3. (not really a direct consequence of 2, but somewhat connected) needs a LOT of dedication and time to modify to conform to my desires and game needs.4. rules heavy, especially in combat.5. written in dry and uncompelling prose.ps: as an example, hackmaster is rule heavy as hell, but is compatible with older editions. and you can easily ignore the rules you don't want to follow.on the other hand, castles and crusades is rules light, compatible with older editions pretty much without conversions and with d20 products with some thinkering (which is invariably less than what a conversion between 2e and 3e would ask for).so, compatibility and felxibility are possible in today's market. it's a design choice not to include them in 3e.</blockquote>

Verification