3e... good for players, more difficult for DMs

[Sholari]

There are a lot of things that are good about 3rd edition, but at least in my experience 3rd edition requires a lot more heavy lifting on the average DMs part. Here are my gripes...

1) More rules to remember. 3rd edition has a lot more rules to keep track of than 1st and 2nd edition. As a DM of many years experience its been more difficult for me to accurately keep track of them all and I can only imagine how it is for fledling DMs.

2) I have to be the bad guy more. I am constantly in the position of saying "no" to my players and waste a lot more time having to look through prestige classes instead of focusing on actual campaign development.

3) Creating NPCs is more of an administrative burden. Before I could drop a 5th level fighter into an adventure... now I have to worry about that fighters feats, skills, etc.

4) Game worlds with less support. None of the new game worlds are as nearly well supported as Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk. When you are a DM without a lot of time you look for a great deal more support from supplements.

5) Preference fragmentation. More options have created more fragmentation of the player base. Having moved states I have found it a lot harder to put together that initial cohesive group than I have during previous editions of D&D.

6) Less quality modules. Modules are either too generic or too world/class specific. I would guess it is harder for designers to create modules that can cover so much possible variation in characters. I have yet to see anything to match the quality of the Desert of Desolition modules, Saltmarsh series, or Slavelord series in actual design.

7) Rapid advancement. Rapid advancement means that I often can not use module series or mega-adventures. It also means that I have to spend a lot more of my focus on changes with characters to maintain game balance.

There is a lot that is good with 3rd edition. However, the point I am trying to make is the mantra... that more options = better for everyone is not always true. There are a lot of negative side effects that if taken to the extreme can mean real problems.

 

[applenerd]

1) More rules to remember. 3rd edition has a lot more rules to keep track of than 1st and 2nd edition. As a DM of many years experience its been more difficult for me to accurately keep track of them all and I can only imagine how it is for fledling DMs.

At least now the rules seem to be more consistent. Even if I don't remember a specific rule I can usually puzzle out what it is by asking myself what makes sense and most times I'm not far off. With second edition I definitely spent a LOT more time looking things up. Play flows much more smoothly now.

2) I have to be the bad guy more. I am constantly in the position of saying "no" to my players and waste a lot more time having to look through prestige classes instead of focusing on actual campaign development.

I tend to agree with you here a bit. The expanded amounts of choice allowed to players in 3E can mean more work for a DM trying to decide whether a particular prestige class will fit into the campaign. Personally however I feel it is very worth the extra effort. I wouldn't want to go back to class kits.

3) Creating NPCs is more of an administrative burden. Before I could drop a 5th level fighter into an adventure... now I have to worry about that fighters feats, skills, etc.

Please refer to pages 47-58 of the dmg. It's not that bad.

4) Game worlds with less support. None of the new game worlds are as nearly well supported as Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk. When you are a DM without a lot of time you look for a great deal more support from supplements.

True, true. Can't wait for Dragonlance 3e to come out!

5) Preference fragmentation. More options have created more fragmentation of the player base. Having moved states I have found it a lot harder to put together that initial cohesive group than I have during previous editions of D&D.

Is this really a problem? I would be interested to hear people's take on this. Personally I have found that the increased variety has brought some of that ever talked about "spice" to my campaign. I also have been able to find common ground game-wise with most 3e players that I have met fairly quickly.

6) Less quality modules. Modules are either too generic or too world/class specific. I would guess it is harder for designers to create modules that can cover so much possible variation in characters. I have yet to see anything to match the quality of the Desert of Desolition modules, Saltmarsh series, or Slavelord series in actual design.

I would tend to agree. Due to the ogl, there has been a glut of garbage modules released. However there have also been some great adventures released by both wotc and third parties. I find the reviews section of this site especially helpful for guiding my purchasing decisions.

7) Rapid advancement. Rapid advancement means that I often can not use module series or mega-adventures. It also means that I have to spend a lot more of my focus on changes with characters to maintain game balance.

Not sure what you mean by this one...

There is a lot that is good with 3rd edition. However, the point I am trying to make is the mantra... that more options = better for everyone is not always true. There are a lot of negative side effects that if taken to the extreme can mean real problems.

Point taken however I feel that 2e certainly wasn't any better (it was much worse imho). I can't speak for 1e since I never played it. There are certainly problems with 3e as with any system this large. However I welcome the small problems the new system brings because overall 3e solves many of the glaringly large problems of 2e. I also have high hopes that 3.5 will help clean up some of the cruft. I'll never go back. Ever.

 

[Buttercup]

1) More rules to remember. 3rd edition has a lot more rules to keep track of than 1st and 2nd edition. As a DM of many years experience its been more difficult for me to accurately keep track of them all and I can only imagine how it is for fledling DMs.

It doesn't seem that bad to me. And if you really don't understand something, you can always ask here, or just leave it out.

2) I have to be the bad guy more. I am constantly in the position of saying "no" to my players and waste a lot more time having to look through prestige classes instead of focusing on actual campaign development.

That's the downside to giving players more choices, but it seems worth it to me. You could always Rule 0 prestige classes. Personally, I've never understood why everyone likes them so much. But there are also more spell and feat choices, and those I don't mind so much. Yeah, some of them are over or underpowered. So I just pick & choose.

3) Creating NPCs is more of an administrative burden. Before I could drop a 5th level fighter into an adventure... now I have to worry about that fighters feats, skills, etc.

Dude, you need to download Jamis Buck's NPC generator. Then all your troubles will be over. You can find it on the downloads page of this site. But you know, I don't usually bother to fully stat out all my NPCs. IF they're cannon fodder, they need AC, HP, saves and equipment. If they're wallpaper, they don't even need that. Only the recurring NPCs IMC get a full stat block and background story.

4) Game worlds with less support. None of the new game worlds are as nearly well supported as Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk. When you are a DM without a lot of time you look for a great deal more support from supplements.

Well, since I never DMed second edition, I have no basis for comparison. But I'm not unhappy with the amount of stuff available to me. If you want a really well-supported world for 3e, play FR, Kalamar or Scarred lands. Actually, the Scarred lands has the most product available, by a long shot, if you don't count the FR novels.

5) Preference fragmentation. More options have created more fragmentation of the player base. Having moved states I have found it a lot harder to put together that initial cohesive group than I have during previous editions of D&D.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I've got one player IMC who used Oriental Adventures to design his character and create a backstory. Another one is using both RR as a source for most of her spells. The other two are just using stuff from the PHB. It hasn't been a problem. I just say that the first two characters are from "far away".

6) Less quality modules. Modules are either too generic or too world/class specific. I would guess it is harder for designers to create modules that can cover so much possible variation in characters. I have yet to see anything to match the quality of the Desert of Desolition modules, Saltmarsh series, or Slavelord series in actual design.

I'm not sure what you're looking for. I don't have a great deal of time to prepare, but I haven't had any trouble putting adventures together. Sometimes I cobble bits of modules together, and sometimes I make them up out of whole cloth. Personally, I think it would be boring to run a campaign completely from modules. YMMV, naturally.

7) Rapid advancement. Rapid advancement means that I often can not use module series or mega-adventures. It also means that I have to spend a lot more of my focus on changes with characters to maintain game balance.

There's a thread about 3e's rapid advancement that has lots of good advice about how to slow a campaign down if you feel the need. Read it here.

There is a lot that is good with 3rd edition. However, the point I am trying to make is the mantra... that more options = better for everyone is not always true. There are a lot of negative side effects that if taken to the extreme can mean real problems.

And this is why Rule 0 is our friend. I can't imagine running a campaign where I allowed everything and anything. It would be a nightmare. I'm glad the options are out there, but that doesn't mean there is a good reason to include them all in a given campaign. Heck, it would be total chaos if you tried.

 

[Fenes 2]

Re: Re: 3e... good for players, more difficult for DMs

Dude, you need to download Jamis Buck's NPC generator. Then all your troubles will be over. You can find it on the downloads page of this site. But you know, I don't usually bother to fully stat out all my NPCs. IF they're cannon fodder, they need AC, HP, saves and equipment. If they're wallpaper, they don't even need that. Only the recurring NPCs IMC get a full stat block and background story.

I do the same. sometimes I stat out an NPC for no reason at all, but usually my NPCs are just descriptions, often with background and motivations, but no stats.

Any NPC I statted out enters my "Goons" file as a statblock without description to be recycled later if I need a statted NPC in a hurry, or want to modify one.

 

[John Smallberries]

1) More rules to remember.

I found the rules fairly intuitive, with a few warts here and there (grappling, for one). Are your players helping here? When we started playing everyone made a concerted effort to understand the rule-set, which really helped me in the long run.

2) I have to be the bad guy more. I am constantly in the position of saying "no" to my players ...

I've found it easier to define the parameters of the game beforehand (for example: Core Rules and OA only, or all FRCS classes except Archmage, etc). In other words, define the size of the sandbox, but let them play in it freely.

3) Creating NPCs is more of an administrative burden.

Hence the popularity of software support. There's a lot out there that can really make your life easier.

4) Game worlds with less support.

Hence the popularity of 3rd party developers. Scarred Lands, Kalamar, Ravenloft, Rokugan, and I'm sure I'm forgetting a few.

5) Preference fragmentation.

You lost me.

6) Less quality modules.

I think the WotC modules are pretty good actually. And agains I'm going to have to point out the dozens of 3rd party developers clamoring for your gaming dollar. Check out the Reviews section and you may find some modules worth playing.

7) Rapid advancement.

I couldn't disagree with you more. It's actually *easier* for me to plan out my game, knowing that the party will be advancing at a fairly constant rate.

 

[Hecatæus]

For book wieght problems some people use the SRD. There are also big PDFs of a number of D20 core and source books floating around...both scanned and OCR entered types. Not exactly legal, but they are out there. I have no idea where to find them. But if you can make them put them on cd and lug them with a laptop, much easier. If you do get them, please collect/make only the ones for which you own the books anyway.

 

[hammymchamham]

re Point #1

I part time DM my saturday night group (switch off every other week), so I can help the DM with rules issues and the other DM helps me when I DM. Speeds things up a lot. Since the majority of the rest of the group doesn't know the rules as much, it also helps cause they can ask us as players when we aren't DMing and allows the DM to concentrate on other things.

 

[jasper]

1. More rules. True but all can be in the two core books. No more checking the Unearthed arcana. Dungeon Survival guide, Rules rarely conflict with each other. And the illusion rules are better. Plus new game system new learning curve. I had less of challenge learn third than unlearning first for second where minor rules were changed. An ex. Where fighters get an attack per level for under 1 hit dice monsters.

2. I had say no more in second with all the splat books, which appeared not to be optional. Now all the splat books are officially optional!

3. No problem here. Fifth level fighter in plate with sword and board need a 15 to ac zero. In third +5 bab. Add any extra stats as need in both. Or if I just want to do the paper work.

4. Pass on this because I remember the modules coming out so infrequently that the dragon magazine had modules in them. And some of those were not Greyhawk etc. I bought modules including Judges Guild and made adjustments to fit my world. I still do.

5. Same problem with second. And with first since I was hopping states and the great pond, the house rules were difficult. Even when you said by the rules players would automatically think you knew the house rules.

6. Same problem with all editions. But now more modules equal more trash and more gems. Everyone says they love the Slavers series in first. I hated and didn’t even buy all the modules for me to dm.

7. Mostly true. However before I switch over. My second edition group when from first to ninth level in nine game months. Just using modules and homebrew. And currently my third edition group has also tied that advancement.

 

[Breakdaddy]

Hehe, I would like to throw in a big "Thank God for Jamis Buck's generators!" as well. I can toss out mad stat blocks for multiple PCs and print hardcopies for just about any situation the PCs might put themselves in

 

[Petrosian]

[/B][/QUOTE]

1) More rules to remember. 3rd edition has a lot more rules to keep track of than 1st and 2nd edition. As a DM of many years experience its been more difficult for me to accurately keep track of them all and I can only imagine how it is for fledling DMs.

IMX 20% of the rules are used 80% of the time. The majority of the other rules are in use rarely. The inherent consistencies make handling things rather simple for me.

2) I have to be the bad guy more. I am constantly in the position of saying "no" to my players and waste a lot more time having to look through prestige classes instead of focusing on actual campaign development.

i said "no" to PRCs right away and saved myself the headaches. next campaign i will list a number of PRCs that are available at the start of the campaign and that list will stay until campaign is over. IMO one of the biggest campaign decisions is how to handle "newly published material" and that is nowehere more evident than PRCs in the glut of PRC publishing in the last several years.

3) Creating NPCs is more of an administrative burden. Before I could drop a 5th level fighter into an adventure... now I have to worry about that fighters feats, skills, etc.

If its a grunt, you dont need to fully flesh it out with feats and skills and such. The person who decides how much detail an NPC needs is the Gm and that should be determined by the role he needs it to play. I love having the character richness built into 3e so that i CAN detailed the grunts abilities down to the skill and feat IF I DECIDE I NEED TO.

4) Game worlds with less support. None of the new game worlds are as nearly well supported as Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk. When you are a DM without a lot of time you look for a great deal more support from supplements.

Greyhawk and Fr are the only official settings IIRC. Most of their old support info is still mostly relevent, isn't it? As for third party settings... the easy answer is "dont use third party crap."

5) Preference fragmentation. More options have created more fragmentation of the player base. Having moved states I have found it a lot harder to put together that initial cohesive group than I have during previous editions of D&D.

I dont quite get this. Are you saying that by providing more options people dont all follow the same paths? I dont see this as a downside.

6) Less quality modules. Modules are either too generic or too world/class specific. I would guess it is harder for designers to create modules that can cover so much possible variation in characters. I have yet to see anything to match the quality of the Desert of Desolition modules, Saltmarsh series, or Slavelord series in actual design.

Since the only "modules" i have bought were the initial ones, i can say... the quality in terms of maps and details and precision seems high. They stories are rather uninspired but then i havent run modules in over a decade. i think wotc decided to use it module series to highlight the play for newbies, not to make them the core of a campaign. While its a decision i think good, i can see why it might not sit well with some.

There certainly has been from my perspective a shift from 1e "modules are for your campaign" to "modules are for showing off the game." I think this is a nod to the audience... which is considerably older and mor experienced than it was for 1e.

7) Rapid advancement. Rapid advancement means that I often can not use module series or mega-adventures. It also means that I have to spend a lot more of my focus on changes with characters to maintain game balance.

Advancement has been more formalized. I cannot say for my self that it is more rapid than before because i think everyone's notion of what it was "before" varies widely.

In my current game we have advanced about 5-6 levels per year of real time gaming, with about 3 sessions a month. In two years they have advanced from 2nd to 12th and i expect that when i close down the campaign at 3 years they will be around 18th.

That pace has seemed fairly good for our gang.

There is a lot that is good with 3rd edition. However, the point I am trying to make is the mantra... that more options = better for everyone is not always true. There are a lot of negative side effects that if taken to the extreme can mean real problems.

i would say that perhaps the answer for a Gm troubled with "too many options" is to make the decisions to limit the things available. If PRCs are an issue, dont allow any. They are not required.

While DND does have optional rules, it might have been good to also have rules identified as "basic" and "advanced" to assist a new Gm or even a more experienced one to more easily identify rules he does not want to use right away.