Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Arrowhawk" data-source="post: 5642817" data-attributes="member: 6679551">Boy, this nails a lot of how I feel on the head...except I came from AD&amp;D 1e and went to 3.5.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;I specifically empathize with your statements about min/maxing.&nbsp; It's one aspect of the game that I feel has undermined the flavor of what D&amp;D was.&nbsp;&nbsp; People have lost sight of exactly what you stated above...&nbsp;&quot;and characters relied more on the players to be unique.&quot;&nbsp;I played D&amp;D Online for a couple of months.&nbsp; DDO is built on the 3.5 engine and it lead to some nasty metagaming.&nbsp; In PnP, the attitude that one build is bettter than another has very little real meaning because you aren't competing against those other builds in the overwhelming majority of people's campaigns.&nbsp; But in DDO, you get situations where parties wouldn't even take non-Drow Wizards/Sorcs.&nbsp; Or they'd boot you if they found out you didn't take the right combo of metamagic feats.&nbsp; Rangers...ha.&nbsp; Despite being extremely useful and versatile the min/maxers insisted the class was gimped and ignorant party leaders would often refuse to take them.&nbsp; Characers were never gimped in 1e...only the players.&nbsp; But with 3.5, you can copy a build and that's all that mattered.&nbsp; &nbsp;At the same time, I get why WotC elminated the restrictions on multiclassing.&nbsp;&nbsp; Multiclassing is immensely popular, especially to the younger generation.&nbsp; Financially it was a smart move.&nbsp;Another way I've come to understand the evoluation of D&amp;D is that WotC realized the DM's had too much trouble offering consistency to the players.&nbsp; The game was so wide open, it was hard for young and inexperienced DM's to handle simple things like trying to bluff the guards.&nbsp; It also meant that DM's could easily be perceived as arbitrary.&nbsp;&nbsp; So I agree that the are better mechanics in 3.5, you just have to live with the trade-offs.&nbsp;&nbsp; In many ways, I think D&amp;D has shifted the burden of the game from the DM to the player.&nbsp;Oddly enough, I got into 3.5 because a group of us started a new campaign with two women who never played D&amp;D and weren't even sure what it was about.&nbsp;&nbsp; I think it has been much easier to navigate them through 3.5 than it would have been with 1e....but maybe that's just me as a DM.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Arrowhawk, post: 5642817, member: 6679551"] Boy, this nails a lot of how I feel on the head...except I came from AD&D 1e and went to 3.5. I specifically empathize with your statements about min/maxing. It's one aspect of the game that I feel has undermined the flavor of what D&D was. People have lost sight of exactly what you stated above... "and characters relied more on the players to be unique." I played D&D Online for a couple of months. DDO is built on the 3.5 engine and it lead to some nasty metagaming. In PnP, the attitude that one build is bettter than another has very little real meaning because you aren't competing against those other builds in the overwhelming majority of people's campaigns. But in DDO, you get situations where parties wouldn't even take non-Drow Wizards/Sorcs. Or they'd boot you if they found out you didn't take the right combo of metamagic feats. Rangers...ha. Despite being extremely useful and versatile the min/maxers insisted the class was gimped and ignorant party leaders would often refuse to take them. Characers were never gimped in 1e...only the players. But with 3.5, you can copy a build and that's all that mattered. At the same time, I get why WotC elminated the restrictions on multiclassing. Multiclassing is immensely popular, especially to the younger generation. Financially it was a smart move. Another way I've come to understand the evoluation of D&D is that WotC realized the DM's had too much trouble offering consistency to the players. The game was so wide open, it was hard for young and inexperienced DM's to handle simple things like trying to bluff the guards. It also meant that DM's could easily be perceived as arbitrary. So I agree that the are better mechanics in 3.5, you just have to live with the trade-offs. In many ways, I think D&D has shifted the burden of the game from the DM to the player. Oddly enough, I got into 3.5 because a group of us started a new campaign with two women who never played D&D and weren't even sure what it was about. I think it has been much easier to navigate them through 3.5 than it would have been with 1e....but maybe that's just me as a DM. [/QUOTE]

Verification