An Examination of Differences between Editions

[MerricB]

And while pre-builds are handy for speeding things up, doesn't that defeat the point of all the flexibility 3e is supposed to have, if everyone uses the pre-builds?

No. It's part of the context of the discussion: when introducing 3e to new players, the starting packages make character creation a lot easier and faster. For experienced players, it's not so important.

In fact, having character creation for experienced players take longer can be seen as an advantage: it gives them more of an investment with their character from the beginning. Also, I don't do character generation at the table in the main - that's something the players do at home before the first session.

Cheers!

 

[Lanefan]

In fact, having character creation for experienced players take longer can be seen as an advantage: it gives them more of an investment with their character from the beginning. Also, I don't do character generation at the table in the main - that's something the players do at home before the first session.

Fine when starting out, but 3 sessions in when they've lost half a party how easy is it (or should it be) to crank out replacements on the fly? *That* is when simplifying char-gen really pays off!

Lanefan

 

[molonel]

I would rather stab out my eyes with a #2 pencil than create an epic 3.X Edition D&D character. Most of the times I've done it, I had to use a spreadsheet.

 

[MerricB]

Fine when starting out, but 3 sessions in when they've lost half a party how easy is it (or should it be) to crank out replacements on the fly? *That* is when simplifying char-gen really pays off!

Err... if you want to be a killer DM, yeah, sure. Having a simple creation system that doesn't invest the players with their PCs is great.

Otherwise, a new PC still doesn't take that long to create.

Cheers!

 

[Hussar]

This is a quote by Monte Cook from his website, discussing 3.x design. Right here he disscuses complexity and how certain aspects of it were engineered into 3.x. He says some of it was already there, but I gotta say with adding Feats it allows for a whole other level that can be daunting to new players. Toughness to a new player sounds cool, but unless they understand the rules how can they know it's crap.

Actually though, just using this example, toughness isn't all that bad. Effectively, most PC's are operating 1 hit die higher in hit points. Ok, toughness for a Barbarian is bad, but, I'm fairly confident that most people can clue into that one. However, toughness for a sorc or mage at 1st level isn't a terrible choice.

Besides that, that's what the learning curve is all about. If I took proficiency bec-du-corbin in AD&D, that would be pretty much a waste of time. It didn't take a whole lot of time, but, there was still a learning curve that Prof-Longsword was the way to go.

For a complete newbie, what's wrong with handing them the pre-gens? It gets the job done and they're playing very quickly. One of the big points for 3e is the fact that players are meant to have some input outside of the game. They are meant to take the time to read the PHB and, yes, buy a Complete book as well. The retraining rules in the PHB 2 take a lot of the sting out of bad choices, but, honestly, our group had been using something similar for years. If you took a NWP, or a skill/feat (depending on edition) and never used it, most DM's including myself, IME, would let you switch it out for something that fit better. To me, the retraining rules simply codified something that a number of groups had been doing all along.

Let's be honest here. Beyond Basic/Expert, D&D has never really been a casual game. There are areas in all editions that were complex. AD&D's combat system wasn't particularly easy - space requirements, initiative rules that were arcane, proficiencies, unarmed attacks, weapon vs armor tables and a host of minis based rules like shield facing and flanking rules etc. 3e has some pretty rough patches of complexity as well. Chargen in 3e is more complex - there are more choices and many of the choices have consequences that will come back time and again.

I'm not sure if that's really a difference between editions. The places of complexity may be different, but, the level of complexity isn't all that different overall.

 

[MerricB]

Actually though, just using this example, toughness isn't all that bad. Effectively, most PC's are operating 1 hit die higher in hit points. Ok, toughness for a Barbarian is bad, but, I'm fairly confident that most people can clue into that one. However, toughness for a sorc or mage at 1st level isn't a terrible choice.

It got even better with retraining (PH2), actually.

Cheers!

 

[Raven Crowking]

Err... if you want to be a killer DM, yeah, sure. Having a simple creation system that doesn't invest the players with their PCs is great.

I don't think that "three sessions in, you've lost half the party" means "you want to be a killer DM". If you are following the DMG guidelines for encounters, this can happen quite easily. In a status quo world, it can happen quite easily.

Assuming, of course, that you aren't coddling the PCs either.

Otherwise, a new PC still doesn't take that long to create.

I'd say not so long at 1st level, for experienced players, but new players can be overwhelmed by the choices.

 

[Imaro]

Actually though, just using this example, toughness isn't all that bad. Effectively, most PC's are operating 1 hit die higher in hit points. Ok, toughness for a Barbarian is bad, but, I'm fairly confident that most people can clue into that one. However, toughness for a sorc or mage at 1st level isn't a terrible choice.

Besides that, that's what the learning curve is all about. If I took proficiency bec-du-corbin in AD&D, that would be pretty much a waste of time. It didn't take a whole lot of time, but, there was still a learning curve that Prof-Longsword was the way to go.

For a complete newbie, what's wrong with handing them the pre-gens? It gets the job done and they're playing very quickly. One of the big points for 3e is the fact that players are meant to have some input outside of the game. They are meant to take the time to read the PHB and, yes, buy a Complete book as well. The retraining rules in the PHB 2 take a lot of the sting out of bad choices, but, honestly, our group had been using something similar for years. If you took a NWP, or a skill/feat (depending on edition) and never used it, most DM's including myself, IME, would let you switch it out for something that fit better. To me, the retraining rules simply codified something that a number of groups had been doing all along.

Let's be honest here. Beyond Basic/Expert, D&D has never really been a casual game. There are areas in all editions that were complex. AD&D's combat system wasn't particularly easy - space requirements, initiative rules that were arcane, proficiencies, unarmed attacks, weapon vs armor tables and a host of minis based rules like shield facing and flanking rules etc. 3e has some pretty rough patches of complexity as well. Chargen in 3e is more complex - there are more choices and many of the choices have consequences that will come back time and again.

I'm not sure if that's really a difference between editions. The places of complexity may be different, but, the level of complexity isn't all that different overall.

Perhaps your right about the complexity always being there, but I'm not sure if the route 3.X took is a good one ie. putting the majority of the complexity square on the players. I mean honestly, my group never read the D&D, AD&D, or 3.x books, yet it seems(IMO) this is more integral to playing 3.x than any other edition. I realize it's good for business, more expansions to players and options for their characters that means more sales since players outnumber DM's.

Toughness is a bad feat in comparison to majority of others for cost vs. what it gives, kind of like skill focus. The problem is a player isn't going to know this without alot more rules mastery than D&D and AD&D required. Even in the core book there are alot of feats to compare and understand

Perhaps your right about the complexity always being there, but I'm not sure if the route 3.X took is a good one ie. putting the majority of the complexity square on the players. I mean honestly, my group never read the D&D, AD&D, or 3.x books, yet it seems(IMO) this is more integral to playing 3.x than any other edition. I realize it's good for business, more expansions to players and options for their characters that means more sales since players outnumber DM's.

Toughness is a bad feat in comparison to majority of others for cost vs. what it gives, kind of like skill focus. The problem is a player isn't going to know this without alot more rules mastery than D&D and AD&D required. Even in the core book there are alot of feats to compare and understand thoroughly.

I posted this in another thread, and at first thought, ok maybe this is just pointless, but if it's pointles(not enough people who want or buy it to make a profit) why publish it. If anything it speaks to the "perceived" complexity of creating a character in D&D 3.x. I personally don't think a game where I have to buy a book with more pages than the PHB to get a good grasp of character creation isn't complex. YMMV of course. Do I think it's complex enough to need something like this? Not really sure yet.

http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Creating-Dungeons-Dragons-Characters/dp/1592576885/

 

[RFisher]

Nitpick: Games are generally not intuitive. They can be intuitable. (Not that it really matters...)

Please, when I talk about BECM D&D, I include Master. Also in RC D&D. Moldvay is simpler, sure, but Mentzer complicated it greatly.

(9_9) It's little surprise that late classic, late 1e, & early 2e have similar features, since they represent a fairly narrow slice of the game's history. So, I felt it was worth representing for pre-1985 D&D.

Besides, did Mentzer really complicate it greatly? Am I wrong that my statements about chargen held through the Companion set? What did the Master set (or even Immortal) add to 1st level chargen? I thought the general skill system didn't appear until the Gazs. Is weapon mastery in the Master set?

Let's be honest here. Beyond Basic/Expert, D&D has never really been a casual game.

Well, if this is only an examination of the differences between editions except Basic/Expert, then I'm out. (^_^)

Honestly, the quick chargen is a side issue to me. I prefer B/X over 3e because it has fewer rules, leaves more open to interpretation, & I generally prefer the rules it does have to the 3e equivalents. Although it can be a casual game, it doesn't have to be. It may sometimes be nice that, by the numbers, creating a character takes five minutes & leveling takes one minute, but in practice my players actually take a lot more time than that creating & developing thier PCs beyond the numbers.

 

[MerricB]

I'd say that book is aimed at players who want to take the step from the real basics of character creation to the next step: skilled character creation.

Here's the thing: you don't need to be a master at D&D character creation to enjoy playing the game. The game is set up so you can have entirely average characters and do well. (CRs are not balanced against optimised PCs; they're balanced against the stock iconic characters). If you want to put the onus on the DM to get things right, you can.

I've made the point before, and I'll make it again: 3e allows the players to invest as much time into the game as the DM does. Where earlier editions didn't allow much thought about the game from the player's role when the game wasn't being played, 3e keeps it interesting by having all these choices - character advancement - to play around with out of the session.

3e doesn't require the players to spend that time, but it does reward them if they do.

As this was a new thing for D&D, the designers made some mistakes, such as the Toughness feat. Mike Mearls has said they've moved away from that type of design. Also, we have things like Retraining (PH2) that allow bad choices to be fixed within the rules.

I have people in my groups who don't read the rulebooks. I have people who spend a lot of time coming up with combos. We all enjoy the game together. D&D 3E actually is quite flexible as to playstyle.

Cheers!