Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 3440472" data-attributes="member: 18280">I have re-written the core rules (to a book that replaces the PHB and parts of the MM), and I have said in the past (and will certainly repeat) that I have been extremely lucky with the players I have.  They prefer my rewrites to the originals, and one is now running a campaign with the intent to introduce them to another group of players.  We'll see how that goes!   <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":eek:" title="Eek!    :eek:"  data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":eek:" />  <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/paranoid.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":uhoh:" title="Paranoid    :uhoh:" data-shortname=":uhoh:" />  <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /> There are many threads in which I've said that, if every player I currently have left the game today, the table would still be full by the end of the week (or words to that effect).  I liken it to baking cookies -- if I'm doing the baking, I get to pick what I make.  If you don't like chocolate chip, I'm not obligated to make you toll house.   <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> I don't think that anyone in this thread is saying that they can't summon the backbone to make a decision, or that they are unable to DM because the presentation of the rules has changed.  (And if anyone is saying that, they can certainly correct me.)  I think that some of us would just like an acknowledgement that the presentation has changed, because this is a prerequisite for discussing whether that change is for the better, or not, or completely neutral.As examples:The CR system is a redress of the Monster Level system from 1e.  There are a number of changes to it that I think are much better; the one change I do not like is that, while the Monster Level system was transparent (though it was spread out; the monster XP calculations are on page 85, whereas the chart to determine what XP are appropriate for what level is on page 174), the CR system is not.  Or, at least it is not using the books that I own.  I also tend to think that the CR system breaks down somewhat at higher levels, even though I find it robust enough at low- to mid-levels to handle low-magic or low-wealth games without needing overhaul.Attack rolls in the D20 system are an inversion of the THAC0 system, first introduced during the 1e days and made official with the advent of 2e.  I find that the D20 method is more intuitive than THAC0, possibly because the math seems more straightforward.....even though I know, really, that it is the same calculation.  If I ever did decided to run a D&D game using an older edition, I would certainly import the D20 method as a house rule.To my mind, the chances between CR and Monster Level are more substantive than the change between D20 attack rolls and THAC0.  Yet, were I to run a 1e game, it would be the change in attack rolls (which is more of a presentational change, IMHO) that I would be most certain to house rule into the game.  I would, frankly, be nonplussed if someone then argued that there was no change (because it was merely presentational), or that my preference for the D20 method over THAC0 meant that I was unable to deal with either D20 or THAC0 if need be.Like I said, though, I did a lot of work to make "my" 3.X game into exactly what I wanted it to be.  I had to rewrite every class (except the rogue, which was perfect), decide what feats to include, include a weapon skill system, rewrite the magic system (again, partly deciding what should be included), rewrite the races, and even rewrite the equipment.  I picked and chose what I liked about earlier editions and updated them to the current rules, and discarded what I disliked about the current rules.The OGL is simply the best thing ever to happen to D&D, and the wellspring of creativity it opened up is enormous (even if sometimes it spews out drek). <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> It's probably true that part of the reason I find this thread so interesting is that I have gone through a lot of this material in various editons relatively recently myself.  The changes are both more substantial than I thought in some cases, and in other cases far less substantial.  IMHO, of course.  YMMV.RC</blockquote>

Verification