Anyone else long for old days simplicity?

[Mark]

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.

You know what, Col H? I never really considered that perspective (regarding the fighter as less "flashy") as being such a huge distinction between the latest edition and those past. Stepping back a bit, I think you've hit the nail on the head with that observation. There's been so many changes that I guess that sort of got lumped (in my mind) with everything else.

Quite astute, indeed, and it does have a huge impact.

While the combat changes do have an effect on the whole game, and all of the character classes, it truly shows up most profoundly with regard to the "straight" fighter.

Time and experience with the system seems the only remedies to the lag in the speed of play. On another note, but related, my own experience and subconscious unwillingness to divorce old rules from new, has caused the majority of problems I've had with getting used to the new system.

 

[Lord Vangarel]

As the originator of this thread I've got a few things to say.

The question was asked primarily because I feel feats complicate npc generation in 3E. I did not say this was a bad thing just that it is more complicated to generate a 9th level 3E fighter than a 9th level 1E fighter.

Some of the last few pages of this thread illustrate all that is bad when people take this too personally. It's a game.

If I was a moderator I would have shut this thread down.

If you want to argue go somewhere else and do it. I wanted a logical discussion where anyone could express an opinion without getting insulted.

On a personal note I still like all versions of D&D. Is one better, I like them all for different reasons. The only part I don't remember all that fondly is the 2E Complete Handbooks, other than that and other small changes 2E was very similar to 1E. Would I play 1E instead of 3E, probably not, I'd feel like I'd want to change too many things, but I stopped playing 1E when 2E came out, 1989 IIRC. But then if I went back 15 years in my life I'd probably do a lot of things differently.

 

[Mark]

This may be a silly question, but as a DM who has to create literally zillons of levelled npcs does anyone else long for previous editions simplicity.

I don't long for the old days. I find that the ability to tailor NPCs more precisely in terms of mechanics allows for a level of consistency that outweighs the potential downside.

In the 1st edition (and 2nd before all the Complete Handbooks) you knew what you where getting with say a 9th level fighter, or for that matter a whatever level anything. With the 3rd edition a 9th level fighter will have at least 9 feats (10 if human). All this takes time . . .

It takes time but it also allows you to know what you are getting, but with further in game mechanics that avoid player disatisfaction.

Don't get me wrong, pretty much everything about 3E is better than previous editions (doesn't have the nostaligic feel of 1E but probably never get that back). Am I the only one that dreams of a similar character creation system? From a player's viewpoint its great, and even fro creating major npcs, but for lots of npcs it just isn't.

From my perspective the nostalgia is tied to the people with which I gamed, not the rules that were in effect. I prefer the newer edition from both a DM and player point of view.

One idea I've thought of is to map out character progressions, for example, suppose you wanted a great horse fighter, if its mapped out as n levels of fighter with these feats etc then it'll make the whole job easier.

That's a good idea. I can see where a lot of DMs would benefit from that work if it were shared.

Another question is I keep reading good things about Hackmaster, how does this compare to 3E in terms of character/npc creation.

No idea. Sorry.

 

[Lord Vangarel]

One more point further to my previous post.

This thread was never intended as a 1E vs 3E discussion. I'm sorry that it developed into one.

The original intention was to say that being a DM the choices offered by 3E tended to make npc generation more difficult than previous editions and was there a solution that anyone knew of.

Some of the suggestions that have been made have definite merit but what happened to the discussion probably stopped a lot of people reading the thread around about yesterday.

 

[Lord Vangarel]

Originally quoted by Mark
but with further in game mechanics that avoid player disatisfaction

I was actually referring to DM dissatisfaction with not feeling I had the time to properly detail the multitude of npcs I like to use in my games.

Originally quoted by Mark
From my perspective the nostalgia is tied to the people with which I gamed, not the rules that were in effect. I prefer the newer edition from both a DM and player point of view.

I would say my nostalgia is based on being younger and how the game seemed newer and more fun. I believe that this was partly due to players and myself not knowing all the stats for the common monsters and the fact that if there wasn't a rule then we just made one up, not consistent I admit. Also every time a new book came out it expanded the possibilities for the game that had just never been considered before. Nowadays most of the possibilities have been considered and so the newness of the system has worn off.

 

[SableWyvern]

Wow.

Lord Vangarel, how many ranks you got in diplomacy?

I go away for half a day, come back and this thread's gone from an interesting discussion to a veritable madhouse and then almost back on track again with just one post from you.

It was worth reading through all the crap just to see that.

 

[Lord Vangarel]

Gee, thanks SableWyvern

 

[SableWyvern]

Actually, having just looked back over this page, Mark deserves some credit too. And perhaps Colonel Hardisson (ah, the fear of Moderators.)

You're welcome, Lord Vangarel. I think I was just surprised to see that the thread got pulled back on track rather than being shut down.

 

[Gez]

You know, NPC generation is not so hard (even without PCGen or Jamis Buck's random generators): just take a look at Wizards of the Coast. When they create the stat block for a NPC, they do it on the fly and without overhead, and if the character ends up bogus, who care ? Not them, anyway. Everyone knows the Elminster-and-other-Chosens-immune-to-spells-they-can't-be-immune case, but there is also the characters-with-prestige-classes-they-do-not-meet-the-requirements-for and other various bugs.

So, if selecting feats for a fighter really bother you, just consider he took Weapon Focus/Weapon Spec with every weapon he owns, and Skill Focus: Profession (Gardener, Butcher, Baker, Shopkeeper, etc) with every regular feats. So, you just add 1 to his attack rolls and 2 to his damage rolls, and here you go.

Alternatively, there are "standard NPC" tables by class and levels in the DMG. A bit crammed, so not easy to read, but you can use them.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I'm editing this, not because I wrote anything bad, but just because I didn't want any of the ill will from before to spill over here incase I inadvertently said something remotely controversial.

I'm glad the thread is back on track, and I'm sorry for the part I played in the ugliness.