Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 5983340" data-attributes="member: 5100">Yes. Absolutely and exactly.Very similar to mine, except I've got at least one player who hates 4e but can't bring himself to play something as &quot;old&quot; as AD&amp;D, so we never made it to playing it, again. The irony is that much of what that player has remarked positively on in 5e are the bits reintroduced from AD&amp;D. If 5e 3ifies AD&amp;D, it's a winner, in my book.The beauty of AD&amp;D wasn't that the rules were awesome. They clearly had flaws in them. It was actually the modularity and creativity they promoted. You could use weapon factors or not, and your game worked. You could use magic items or not, and your game worked. Okay, that one required a bit of tweaking, but it was so obvious what the impacts were that you could do it on the fly without breaking anything. I built new classes and races all the time, and they worked great. If you try any of that in 3e and 4e, it's actually work -- and it feels like work, not play. There are too many land mines to be too creative with 3e &amp; 4e in the same way as AD&amp;D.I guess, in a way, AD&amp;D was awesome because it was clear that the rules of an RPG were fundamentally different from a board or card game. The DM wasn't just there to be your door into another world. Gary calling the DM a &quot;referee&quot; was very meaningful. It was the DM's job to make calls on the fly and even to tweak the rules to make the game suit the group, setting, and story.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mercule, post: 5983340, member: 5100"] Yes. Absolutely and exactly. Very similar to mine, except I've got at least one player who hates 4e but can't bring himself to play something as "old" as AD&D, so we never made it to playing it, again. The irony is that much of what that player has remarked positively on in 5e are the bits reintroduced from AD&D. If 5e 3ifies AD&D, it's a winner, in my book. The beauty of AD&D wasn't that the rules were awesome. They clearly had flaws in them. It was actually the modularity and creativity they promoted. You could use weapon factors or not, and your game worked. You could use magic items or not, and your game worked. Okay, that one required a bit of tweaking, but it was so obvious what the impacts were that you could do it on the fly without breaking anything. I built new classes and races all the time, and they worked great. If you try any of that in 3e and 4e, it's actually work -- and it feels like work, not play. There are too many land mines to be too creative with 3e & 4e in the same way as AD&D. I guess, in a way, AD&D was awesome because it was clear that the rules of an RPG were fundamentally different from a board or card game. The DM wasn't just there to be your door into another world. Gary calling the DM a "referee" was very meaningful. It was the DM's job to make calls on the fly and even to tweak the rules to make the game suit the group, setting, and story. [/QUOTE]

Verification