Assess this chap's position (3.0 and older versions)

[Lonely Tylenol]

Total crap because the same applies to every ruleset of D&D (and there were some famous quotes regarding "You're not REALLY playing D&D" in older versions that are being conveniently forgotten.

Famous quotes from E. Gary Gygax himself! Which I'm too lazy to look up!

 

[billd91]

Everything is d20 + X eh?

How does a dying character stabalize?

Of course there are things that you roll other than just a d20+X, if you're going to pick nits. That doesn't change the fact that the d20 mechanic of rolling d20+X is pretty pervasive and applies to the vast majority of rolls you're going to make, especially in contrast to 1st/2nd edition D&D (and 2nd edition is better in that regard than 1st).

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Everything is d20 + X eh?

How does a dying character stabalize?

By rolling a 19 or 20 on a d20.

 

[Storm Raven]

Everything is d20 + X eh?

How does a dying character stabalize?

d20 + 0 against a DC of 19.

 

[eyebeams]

I have a two beefs with 3.x

1) I don't care for the level of prep encounters require in 3.x. or the number of rules (from area of effect templates to AoOs and their associated feat and ability structures) that are balanced by relative positioning on a battlemap. These are integrated rules, and the most common retort that guesstimating preserves balance is an example of people fooling themselves. Do yourself a favour and watch the same scenario played with and without a mat (I have) and you'll see.

2) Relaxed multiclassing has led to character class inflation, since a class must provide level by level incentives to remain. This means that there are lots of class abilities that simply exist to fill an advancement slot and do not especially add fun or flavour. Part of the problem is just age; as game age, the power level always tends to ramp up, as people who played Players' Option Vampire 2nd or even Warhammer 40K back in the day (around the time that had to add new abilities to Space Marines because they were too wimpy compared to equivalents in other armies) know well.

That's pretty much it.

 

[harmyn]

That's nice. Beleive what you want. If you are so invested in the propaganda that you can come to me with a straight face and say that, I don't think my time would be well spent trying to disabuse you of it.



Sentence 1: I am in denial
Sentence 2: But I am not all that wrong...



Um, you say "but to claim" and then follow it up with a string of text that has no claim in it. Put down a claim you think I am making and I'll let you know whether or not it matches what I am actually claiming.

And on a side note, is strawmanning on the rise on these boards or is it just me?

.......

Psion, first I must state that I failed to properly divide my previous post, only the Denial aspect at the beginning was directed at you. The rest was a simple brief comparison over some of the aspects of the two games. I was not attempting to attack any of your positions save the one based on Wealth/Magic assumptions in 3.x. That was the claim I was referring too. You claimed the new edition wasn't built on the assumption of amassed wealth and magic. I was pointing out that the entire CR system is based on the concept of characters having a certain level of wealth and magic at each level and if they don't then the charts become flawed and unworkable in terms of the highly praised "balance" in the new system.

As to the other points, I was simply comparing them and pointing out that each system has its own set of flaws and no one is superior to the other.

I do feel for those where were math deficient though and cannot grasp THAC0. But I am surprised that you or your group would have dificulties with that, but NOT with subtracting 5 off your to-hit rolls and adding 10 onto your damage if wielding a two-handed weapon. That sounds just as hard as saying I have a THAC0 of 18 and rolled a 13 so I hit an AC of 5. Same thing in saying that my AC is being upped by 4 by dropping my attack roll by 4 and having to remember to take 4 off each roll for every round I want to keep it in effect.

As for the d20 mechanic, you completely avoided the fact that the actual DC needed to accomplish your task varies with just about every skill. So you roll and add numbers, if you have to keep looking up what the total number means in terms of success then its not that much faster really.

 

[billd91]

<snip>

I do feel for those where were math deficient though and cannot grasp THAC0. But I am surprised that you or your group would have dificulties with that, but NOT with subtracting 5 off your to-hit rolls and adding 10 onto your damage if wielding a two-handed weapon. That sounds just as hard as saying I have a THAC0 of 18 and rolled a 13 so I hit an AC of 5. Same thing in saying that my AC is being upped by 4 by dropping my attack roll by 4 and having to remember to take 4 off each roll for every round I want to keep it in effect.

As for the d20 mechanic, you completely avoided the fact that the actual DC needed to accomplish your task varies with just about every skill. So you roll and add numbers, if you have to keep looking up what the total number means in terms of success then its not that much faster really.

Not every character is going to have Power Attack and the ones who choose it will have to accept the consequences of doing a little more math. By contrast, pretty much everyone had to use THAC0.

As far as having varied DCs, that's not really a big deal. The general mechanic is the same even if the targets vary (as they really should, some tasks being harder than others).

 

[JoeGKushner]

Of course there are things that you roll other than just a d20+X, if you're going to pick nits. That doesn't change the fact that the d20 mechanic of rolling d20+X is pretty pervasive and applies to the vast majority of rolls you're going to make, especially in contrast to 1st/2nd edition D&D (and 2nd edition is better in that regard than 1st).

I agree. Just pointing out that sweeping generalizations are usually wrong.

Concealment has a % chance to miss as well.

Spell failure for wearing armor has a % chance to fail.

There are probably other subsystems in the system that I could point out but the point is, not everything is d20 based.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Just pointing out that sweeping generalizations are usually wrong.

Tee hee.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Tee hee.

The irony of the irony eh?

Tee hee if you want but you know it's true.