Anyone else long for old days simplicity?

[rounser]

Directly - I did not say that! If that's the issue you had with me, then you may be mistaking me for someone else on this thread.

I know you didn't. But you did reply to a post in which I was taking such a statement to issue, so my quarrel wasn't with your words.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I replied because there have been a lot of posters who come in and dive-bomb 3e with unfavorable comparisons to 1e or 2e. On 1e and 2e sites, the disparagement of 3e is much uglier and unreasoning; at least here many of us have actually owned and played the editions we diss. 1e and 2e fans very often freely admit to never playing 3e, but hate it nevertheless.

Eric Noah once said to someone who came from a 1e site and flamed 3e and 3e players here: "It's like going to the chocolate-lovers convention and screaming "I hate chocolate!"" Or words very much to that effect. One is bound to get an argument in such a situation.

 

[hong]

Personally, I think that when people start arguing about arguing, that's when it's time to close the thread.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Personally, I think that when people start arguing about arguing, that's when it's time to close the thread.

Yeah, I guess you're right. But I think rounser and I have been trying to remove some of the ire of earlier in the thread. I hate leaving things on an ugly note. I also hate being one of the last few posters on a closed thread; everyone checks the last page to see why it was closed, and Piratecat or whoever does the closing says something like "Shame on you all for your shenanigans - thread closed - I'm disgusted!" and then everyone looks to see what the last few posts were, the ones that broke the camel's back, and there I am...

 

[Mark]

Maybe I'll squeeze my own opinion in here.

It's my estimation that while OD&D and 1E, and to some extent 2E, might have been easier to "wing" overall, 3E is infinitely easier to "wing" with steady consistency.

My two cents...

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Yeah, Mark, I see your point, and I agree with that.

I could wing stuff easy with 1e, but it was after years of play and reading the books, so I knew all the monster stats and saves and stuff by heart, not because it was easier or more intuitive.

 

[Mark]

Yeah, Mark, I see your point, and I agree with that.

I could wing stuff easy with 1e, but it was after years of play and reading the books, so I knew all the monster stats and saves and stuff by heart, not because it was easier or more intuitive.

Plus, if I may, the earlier editions simply had less stuff (maybe excluding the late 2E period) to memorize, making the learning curve for "wingers" quite a bit lower. IMHO.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I agree and disagree.

On one hand, 1e/2e had less detail to remember, but what was there was often arbitrary and inconsistent, making it hard to remember what needed to be remembered. Like all the different saves.

In 3e, the d20 mechanic makes everything a bit more intuitive; the higher you roll, the better. That wasn't always true of earlier D&D.

 

[Mark]

I agree and disagree.

On one hand, 1e/2e had less detail to remember, but what was there was often arbitrary and inconsistent, making it hard to remember what needed to be remembered. Like all the different saves.

In 3e, the d20 mechanic makes everything a bit more intuitive; the higher you roll, the better. That wasn't always true of earlier D&D.

I see what you mean and can't help but agree with you.

The saving throw tables, in particular, were a lot to remember, but things on that order were easily referenced on DM screens.

I suppose that the mechanics of 3E are harder to "wing" in general because there's such a high degree of cross-referencing involved, especially in combat situations. *shrug*

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I suppose that the mechanics of 3E are harder to "wing" in general because there's such a high degree of cross-referencing involved, especially in combat situations. *shrug*

Yes, on that I agree wholeheartedly. It's probably the best compromise they could come up with, though. Use the sheer simpilicity of the 1e combat system, or try to make combat more colorful and varied, but slower; that was the choice. Since fighters had always been pretty much the class with the least going for it bells-'n'-whistles-wise, they made the right choice. I'm guessing that a few years with the new system and I'll have it down pat.