NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Treebore" data-source="post: 3265367" data-attributes="member: 10177">So your talking about people who actually followed the rules! OK, I can see those arguments. Just I was lucky enough to never have a DM who let rules get in the way of playing a good character.I think we all ignored race/class limitations, for the most part. I remember a DM who would not allow dwarves, Gnomes, or Halflings to be a Paladin. I also remember one who did follow the race/class level rules, because that is the only way they could see elves and dwarves not ruling the world, because they have centuries to gain levels. Still a very valid thought in 3E, except that everyone can become epic level before they hit the age of 20.Still, those were not the "classes" themselves that limited you. Those were "racial" limitations. But yeah, taken as a "complete rule set", and actually being followed, I can see how people were definitely limited. But to say it was all because of the "classes", no, those alone did not limit anyone.The "other" rules, such as the race and sex descriminations (can't be this class, can't go above this level, can't have a STR above 18/50, etc...) is where the real limitations came in.Guess I was just lucky that I ran into, and was one of the, DM's who ignored all those "stupid and unfair" rules. Heck, many of us had "skill rules" and rules for increasing stats.I think I have now remembered why I took so long to switch to 3E. It wasn't that big of an improvement over mine and Doug's house ruled 2E games. I guess it was the positive AC values and simpler save rules that finally convinced me/us it was worth it.</blockquote>

Verification