Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 4848688" data-attributes="member: 957">Allister,&nbsp; I don't feel picked on in the least.I agree with your assessment of pre-3E D&amp;D.I thought D&amp;D was awesome when I first found it as a kid, but I quickly left it when better games came along.&nbsp; I have no loyalty to the name.Make no mistake, the pure concept of D&amp;D was ground-breaking and the genius of that alone may be greater than any other advance since then.&nbsp; But other advances have been built on that since then.I think requiring validation of old D&amp;D as a standard now is pointless.The vacuum tube was a great invention.&nbsp; I don't use those any longer either.I came back to 3E not because it was the new edition of &quot;D&amp;D&quot; but because I honestly found it to be a huge advance in pulling together great ideas that had already been developed in other games.I was responding to the assertion that the math of 3E not working as it does in 4E somehow being a bad thing.&nbsp; I think it is very important to keep that context in mind.&nbsp; As I see it, 4E is built to be a perpetually fine-tuned balanced conflict resolution system and 3E was built to be character modeling system.&nbsp; Are those things mutually exclusive?&nbsp; Hell no.&nbsp; But the difference in emphasis is striking.Why do you think I don't expect character to become more &quot;metal&quot;?&nbsp;&nbsp; High level 3E characters are vastly more resilient in all ways than low level 3E characters.&nbsp; The difference is there is a much richer range of strengths and weaknesses.&nbsp; Even if &quot;weakness&quot; is a relative term.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 4848688, member: 957"] Allister, I don't feel picked on in the least. I agree with your assessment of pre-3E D&D. I thought D&D was awesome when I first found it as a kid, but I quickly left it when better games came along. I have no loyalty to the name. Make no mistake, the pure concept of D&D was ground-breaking and the genius of that alone may be greater than any other advance since then. But other advances have been built on that since then. I think requiring validation of old D&D as a standard now is pointless. The vacuum tube was a great invention. I don't use those any longer either. I came back to 3E not because it was the new edition of "D&D" but because I honestly found it to be a huge advance in pulling together great ideas that had already been developed in other games. I was responding to the assertion that the math of 3E not working as it does in 4E somehow being a bad thing. I think it is very important to keep that context in mind. As I see it, 4E is built to be a perpetually fine-tuned balanced conflict resolution system and 3E was built to be character modeling system. Are those things mutually exclusive? Hell no. But the difference in emphasis is striking. Why do you think I don't expect character to become more "metal"? High level 3E characters are vastly more resilient in all ways than low level 3E characters. The difference is there is a much richer range of strengths and weaknesses. Even if "weakness" is a relative term. [/QUOTE]

Verification