3e and the Test of Time

[drnuncheon]

What I think will (or won't) stand the test of time:

Most of the WOTC 'crunch' won't - but that's OK. The're producing the core books, and they'll produce the next set.

The setting books will remain useful. I happily ran some Planescape in 3e and see no reason not to do the same for Spelljammer, Dark Sun, Birthright, or whatever other setting you might enjoy - so why not do the same for those, Eberron, Midnight, and others in 4e and beyond?

The really good 3rd party stuff will as well: the "Idea" books. Malhavoc's got many great examples: Requiem for a God and When the Sky Falls, BOEM3: The Nexus, Beyond Countless Doorways...all would add a lot to any edition and not too tough to transfer. You could probably make a decent stab at converting Bastion's Alchemy & Herbalists, or Airships.

Adventures, funnily enough, would probably also do well. I've converted Isle of Dread and considered others, and I can't imagine that I wouldn't be willing to convert the Freeport trilogy or Of Sound Mind.

J

 

[Psion]

There will always been new ways of doing things, or new stories to tell. I use the older books because the 3e books do not provide what I need or even make the attempt.

Fair enough.

Now, what quality of 3e is responsible for this? Or is it just a taste thing? What does this say about longevity or quality of the system? Is it because you were already comfortable with the older material you were using, or is it actually something that can be said about 3e.

IOW, consider what you are really hoping to analyze. Are you really saying anything about the D&D audience as a whole?

 

[Belen]

Fair enough.

Now, what quality of 3e is responsible for this? Or is it just a taste thing? What does this say about longevity or quality of the system? Is it because you were already comfortable with the older material you were using, or is it actually something that can be said about 3e.

IOW, consider what you are really hoping to analyze. Are you really saying anything about the D&D audience as a whole?

My main contention is that 3e lacks the quality that made us stick with RPGs over the years. OD&D, 1e and 2e all had that quality that made D&D more than a game.

3e is a great ruleset, but I do not think it will lead to the retension of gamers.

 

[Psion]

My main contention is that 3e lacks the quality that made us stick with RPGs over the years. OD&D, 1e and 2e all had that quality that made D&D more than a game.

I sort of gathered that from your initial post.

My point is: what is this "quality" of which you speak? Is it anything that can said to be a quality of the game as a whole, the market? Is this "quality" just your personal taste, or is this "quality" something that can be fairly generalized to be an objective statement about the "quality" of the game.

Particularly that last sentence. I'm not seeing how you make a leap from your perception to some objective quality. How do you justify saying "us" instead of "me" in the above quoted statement?

(Speaking personally, I've had some rip-roaring campaigns I can reminisce about in 1e and 2e. And I have had one in 3e. I'm not personally seeing any driving difference, beyond that I find certain rules make 3e easier to make calls for, using a single unified system makes things easier for players with a less than encyclopedic knowledge of the rules, and there are less non-optional rules that everyone ignores, which only improves the experience AFAIAC.)

 

[UniversalMonster]

I don't buy this.

I've been playing since 1978; AD&D 1st edition, TMNT, Torg, Rifts, DC Heroes, Mage: TA, Everway, etc..

My best and most significant campaigns have been D&D3 and 3.5. They've been better than the high school game-every-day romance phase (which was significant and memorable in itself) , through the college years when I had pretty much the ultimate gaming group (the Sneed Hall gamers at Texas Tech, a great group of about 20 rotating guys. You could always get a game going and they were very cool guys with a few exceptions. )And on into adulthood.

But all of that pales in comparison to the period from 2000-now. Weekly game, excellent group of players, great campaign story and awesome characters. I don't know what else to ask for, really.

 

[Belen]

But all of that pales in comparison to the period from 2000-now. Weekly game, excellent group of players, great campaign story and awesome characters. I don't know what else to ask for, really.

None of your reasons for having such a great game have anything to do with 3e.

 

[Abstraction]

I do have to admit that I cannot put myself as much into the D&D fantasy as I could when I was twelve. But then, I also cannot put myself into books, movies, comic books, toys or laying around imagining crazy stuff. It has nothing to do with ruleset.

That magical feel that drew me into D&D had more to do with my first gamemasters and with my youthful need to play than it had to do with the rulebooks. At that, I recall that our very earliest games were just terribly hack-n-slash. When we got tired of mindless combat, we finally started real world-building and got hooked into more complex storylines, more rounded characters. Same as the hack-n-slash newbies of today will eventually mature. It all has everything to do with DM, nothing to do with rules. If the rules of 3E do anything, they make it easier to be a good DM because everything is so clear that there doesn't need to be any bickering.

By the way, I started with Basic in 1980, so I think I can consider myself a grognard.

 

[Belen]

I sort of gathered that from your initial post.

My point is: what is this "quality" of which you speak? Is it anything that can said to be a quality of the game as a whole, the market? Is this "quality" just your personal taste, or is this "quality" something that can be fairly generalized to be an objective statement about the "quality" of the game.

There is no doubt that 3e is a "quality" game.

The rules are dry. They lack the imagination and prose that brought previous games to life. And they tend to be overly complex when they do not need to be.

Some people say that the toolkit approach is great. It's fine for a board game approach, but not for a RPG.

 

[JPL]

All the girls were so much prettier when I was 15.

These girls today...they lack a special something.

I mean, Staci, the first girl I ever kissed, back in 1989? They just don't build girls like that anymore.

And the music is not as good. And the sky is not as blue.

 

[Belen]

All the girls were so much prettier when I was 15.

These girls today...they lack a special something.

I mean, Staci, the first girl I ever kissed, back in 1989? They just don't build girls like that anymore.

And the music is not as good. And the sky is not as blue.

Really? The older I get, the better the women look. They did not make 'em then like they are now!