Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 2533139" data-attributes="member: 2013">It wasn't meant as a &quot;sour grapes&quot; post - I really was trying to figure out what the different &quot;feel&quot; was.And I felt that I was right - remember level limits?&nbsp; Class restrictions?&nbsp; &quot;Sorry, your elf can't be a cleric, only a fighter or magic-user or thief.&quot;&quot;Sorry, you don't have that proficiency, you can't do that.&quot;&quot;Sorry, there's no spell that does that, you can't do that.&quot;&quot;Sorry, you're a human, you can't multiclass.&nbsp; And you're a demihuman, you can't dual-class.&quot;&quot;Sorry, there are no rules for making magic items, you can't make them.&nbsp; Only find them.&quot;&quot;Sorry, you're not a thief; you can't disarm the trap or pick the lock.&quot;...and on and on and on.As a GM, it's simpler.&nbsp; You know pretty much every option your players can try well in advance of running the adventure... because &quot;if it's not on their character sheet, they can't do it.&quot;&nbsp; As a new player, it is nice to have the &quot;hand-holding&quot; for a while, but once you figure out how to play, it really gets frustrating and holds you back... &quot;but WHY can't my wizard so much as put on plate mail... I need to pass as a fighter... but I don't have the Disguise proficiency, so I'm hosed anyway...&quot;&nbsp; OTOH, when the players DO try something strange, it's a little tough on the GM to make a quick judgement call and then be consistent with it later on.In 3e, there's kind of a &quot;can do&quot; attitude.&nbsp; Basically, the players are allowed to try just about ANYTHING - and there's a lot of rules to help them do so.&nbsp; As a GM, it's a nightmare because you can't prepare for EVERYTHING the players might be hare-brained enough to come up with.&nbsp; As a beginning player, it's a bit overwhelming, but once you gain experience it's very liberating.&nbsp; OTOH, as a GM, it's nice not to have to spot-rule something very often (and try to keep your rulings consistent over time).So I'm not trying to sour-grapes things.&nbsp; There is good and bad in each approach.&nbsp; I'm just pointing out that earlier editions tended to be restrictive... &quot;you can't do this because you can only do what I say you can do.&quot;&nbsp; (Half-orc paladins?&nbsp; No.) while 3e tends to be &quot;well, you can do this, but you have to trade off that&quot; (Half-orc paladins? Yes, but since a half-orc takes a Cha penalty, it's not always a great idea).--The Sigil</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Sigil, post: 2533139, member: 2013"] It wasn't meant as a "sour grapes" post - I really was trying to figure out what the different "feel" was. And I felt that I was right - remember level limits? Class restrictions? "Sorry, your elf can't be a cleric, only a fighter or magic-user or thief." "Sorry, you don't have that proficiency, you can't do that." "Sorry, there's no spell that does that, you can't do that." "Sorry, you're a human, you can't multiclass. And you're a demihuman, you can't dual-class." "Sorry, there are no rules for making magic items, you can't make them. Only find them." "Sorry, you're not a thief; you can't disarm the trap or pick the lock." ...and on and on and on. As a GM, it's simpler. You know pretty much every option your players can try well in advance of running the adventure... because "if it's not on their character sheet, they can't do it." As a new player, it is nice to have the "hand-holding" for a while, but once you figure out how to play, it really gets frustrating and holds you back... "but WHY can't my wizard so much as put on plate mail... I need to pass as a fighter... but I don't have the Disguise proficiency, so I'm hosed anyway..." OTOH, when the players DO try something strange, it's a little tough on the GM to make a quick judgement call and then be consistent with it later on. In 3e, there's kind of a "can do" attitude. Basically, the players are allowed to try just about ANYTHING - and there's a lot of rules to help them do so. As a GM, it's a nightmare because you can't prepare for EVERYTHING the players might be hare-brained enough to come up with. As a beginning player, it's a bit overwhelming, but once you gain experience it's very liberating. OTOH, as a GM, it's nice not to have to spot-rule something very often (and try to keep your rulings consistent over time). So I'm not trying to sour-grapes things. There is good and bad in each approach. I'm just pointing out that earlier editions tended to be restrictive... "you can't do this because you can only do what I say you can do." (Half-orc paladins? No.) while 3e tends to be "well, you can do this, but you have to trade off that" (Half-orc paladins? Yes, but since a half-orc takes a Cha penalty, it's not always a great idea). --The Sigil [/QUOTE]

Verification