Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Greenfield" data-source="post: 5642638" data-attributes="member: 6669384">I like things about both.The character progression in the earlier editions was designed to let character advance out of the low levels relatively quickly, then linger at the mid-levels for a time.&nbsp; You had time to explore what your character was, and what they could be.&nbsp; 3.* changed that so that level advancement was at a steady rate, and it became far too easy to concentrate on what your character was about to become, rather on what they were.The old Save system was fraught with conflict:&nbsp; What if someone cast a death spell from a wand or staff?&nbsp; Did you Save v Death or Save v Rod/Wand/Staff?But the pure fun of the game has always been in the story.&nbsp; A good DM can make any system work, and a bad DM can't make any system work.&nbsp; What we need are systems for all the DMs between those two extremes.&nbsp; Mechanically, 3.5 fills the bill better than 2.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Greenfield, post: 5642638, member: 6669384"] I like things about both. The character progression in the earlier editions was designed to let character advance out of the low levels relatively quickly, then linger at the mid-levels for a time. You had time to explore what your character was, and what they could be. 3.* changed that so that level advancement was at a steady rate, and it became far too easy to concentrate on what your character was about to become, rather on what they were. The old Save system was fraught with conflict: What if someone cast a death spell from a wand or staff? Did you Save v Death or Save v Rod/Wand/Staff? But the pure fun of the game has always been in the story. A good DM can make any system work, and a bad DM can't make any system work. What we need are systems for all the DMs between those two extremes. Mechanically, 3.5 fills the bill better than 2. [/QUOTE]

Verification