3.5 Missing Link

[6pakofdwarves]

I think that it is not the character options, but the tactical options that take me "out" of the game. Before 3e we just described what we did, we did not plot it out like super chess. I think the description added to the level of versimilitude. I know you can describe what you do now, but you have to think about how many squares to move, AoA's, can I do that much in this round and all of that at the same time. Now, I like the tactical aspect of the game, but I see where Warbringer is coming from.

 

[Gutboy Barrelhouse]

Wow. I got here before Diaglo.
P'raps you miss the simplicity and charm of the Classics, my friend?
A session of your favorite out-of-print D&D might cure what ails you.
I also highly recommend C&C. Great fun.

Regards,
GBBH

 

[Quasqueton]

You are coming to the same conclusions that I recently have. 3.5e is <snip blatant hyperbole insults to D&D3>

So what to do? The answer may lie in an elegent third party solution called <snip blatant sales pitch for other game>

Check out a few sites on it -- you might like it:

Sad.

Quasqueton

 

[Jackelope King]

You are coming to the same conclusions that I recently have. 3.5e is a bloated power-gaming mess. Feats, prestige classes, and all this over-the-top crunch material. Where has the role-play gone when you spend half your session or more doing the math for a single battle? It goes out the window. Maximized spells are awful. And how about the actions? Move action, full round action, standard action, quickened action, swift action, etc, etc. It's mind boggling. The game has been reduced to something more akin to a video game.

[sarcasm]Because if you give any thought to the mechanical aspect of the game, you're a bad roleplayer. Makes perfect sense. Clearly there's no chance that someone who enjoys the mechanical aspects of the game could be as good a roleplayer as you are.[/sarcasm]

 

[Hussar]

I must play with mental giants or something. My combats never devolve into the kind of number crunching messes that people talk about here. The fact that I have a 40 second shot clock to speed things along helps, but, even before I started doing that, most people didn't need all that much time to figure out what to do and how to do it. I really am confused about all the angst I see among players who cannot seem to grasp the concept that you add all the numbers together. Let's see, my 1/2 fire elemental priest of Cuthbert does a two handed power attack while smiting and using his divine might feat. Roll d20 -2 +4 + str bonus + bab for the to hit roll and d8+4+3+3+2 for the damage. This isn't exactly advanced calculus here.

Don't people take the time outside of the game to write crib notes for this kind of stuff? Heck, I always did that, regardless of edition.

 

[scadgrad]

Warbringer,

I thought I'd chirp in before this thread gets shut down, which I imagine will probably happen as soon as the edition war really starts to heat up. It sounds to me that like a lot of us grognards (I'm a married w/ kids 40-something who's played since '78), the current edition just isn't as much fun for you. I urge you to pick up C&C and then nail on whatever options from 3.5 (feats for instance) or any other version of D&D you like. I think you'll find it to be a breath of fresh air. You could go back and play a few session of AD&D or BD&D, but I believe that C&C is so close to those and infinitely more compatible w/ the current rules, that it is the better choice.

Or you could just do as most of the 3.5 Crew here on EnWorld would suggest; ignore your problems w/ 3.5 'cause it rules.



All kidding aside...

To answer the question that you raise at the end of your thread, I feel that many, if not most, of the players do spend an inordinate amount of time fretting about "builds," feat chains, feat/skill synergies, and all sorts of other loverly, crunchy goodness (such as PrCs as you mention). This leads to the exact situation that you posit, the Crunch and Goodies define the character. As many champions of 3.5 will rightfully point out, it doesn't have to be that way, especially if you limit your players to the core rulebooks only, but even then, there's still a lot more crunch than in games that are more character/fluff driven.

 

[scadgrad]

I must play with mental giants or something. My combats never devolve into the kind of number crunching messes that people talk about here.

Maybe you do, but our combats did on a nightly basis as a matter of fact, and most of my group is at least college educated with a masters or two sprinkled in and one terminal degree. In our C&C game the other night (different group though), we got through 4 separate combats and all of them flowed much more smoothly than they did in 3.0. I know because I ran the same module in 3.0 with a different group. We accomplished all of that in the span of about 3 hours of gaming.

The fact that I have a 40 second shot clock to speed things along helps, but, even before I started doing that, most people didn't need all that much time to figure out what to do and how to do it.

My group complained bitterly when we tried to institute a time limit. It's great idea if you can get your guys to buy into it. Good for you.

I really am confused about all the angst I see among players who cannot seem to grasp the concept that you add all the numbers together....

Great mechanic and improvement in 3.X is the "always roll high and add stuff up" approach to resolving checks. I think it's just the seemingly endless types of kickers (such as smite, two-handed weapon powerattack, etc.) that make it overly complex.

Don't people take the time outside of the game to write crib notes for this kind of stuff? Heck, I always did that, regardless of edition.

More's the pity, but sadly most players in my experience aren't like you. That results in too many "too the Books!" moments.

 

[Warbringer]

Hey all

I've really enjoyed this thread; one thing I've found about this community is that it does rally to somone when they have a gaming-depression.

So I think Wizards haas given me an out

I have about eight adventures I written in last few years that I consider decent. With the contest aanouncement I'm going to polish them and send them in. Where this helps is that I am going to only allow core books (+minis book) in the campaign as that is all the adventures allow.

Also, I picked up C+C, Blue rose and True20. I really like the latter...

Thanks for the sugesstions and support

 

[ghul]

[sarcasm]Because if you give any thought to the mechanical aspect of the game, you're a bad roleplayer. Makes perfect sense. Clearly there's no chance that someone who enjoys the mechanical aspects of the game could be as good a roleplayer as you are.[/sarcasm]

Yeah, that's exactly what I said. Not. What I was implying was that the *opportunity* to RP is severly diminished when tactical elements dominate the game for large amounts of the session. Of course you can be a good strategist and RPer. I have players in my group that are one, the other, or both.

--Ghul

(I edited out the name-calling. - Eridanis)

 

[Len]

I have about eight adventures I written in last few years that I consider decent. With the contest aanouncement I'm going to polish them and send them in.

So that's what happens when a gamer grows up - he becomes a game designer.