Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Imret" data-source="post: 2740262" data-attributes="member: 991">Alright, hopefully I've attributed that quote correctly and I've correctly determined what you're saying. I'll start by saying I like this system, I like it quite a bit, and I may in fact decide to use it myself. I'm not sure it's better or worse than the mechanics as written as far as new DM's go; a system of sliding scales with set difficulties (fairly similar to Interlock, IMO) requires a bit more clever adjudication and balancing than the RAW, but I think it is a good idea.OTOH, at least the quasi-unified mechanic of 3.X D&amp;D means that this system -could- be used. There was simply no mechanic for it in 1e/2e, unless you want to count the largely non-functional NWP's from 2e AD&amp;D; frankly, everybody I knew that didn't just use their wizard/priest slots for languages and history or their rogue picks for Tumbling went with Bowyer/Fletcher (because only the bow was worth using as a ranged weapon), Blind-Fighting (because it always worked), and Tracking. Anything else was a pointless flavor skill you'd never, ever use. And if you did somehow use them, you had to have the modifier to the appropriate attribute on hand and remember you're rolling under. Again, I know you're not claiming that 1e/2e was better than 3.X, just pointing out that the mechanics might not be as good as they could be. All I have to say in reply is &quot;At least they look unified on the surface, particularly if you disregard damage&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Imret, post: 2740262, member: 991"] Alright, hopefully I've attributed that quote correctly and I've correctly determined what you're saying. I'll start by saying I like this system, I like it quite a bit, and I may in fact decide to use it myself. I'm not sure it's better or worse than the mechanics as written as far as new DM's go; a system of sliding scales with set difficulties (fairly similar to Interlock, IMO) requires a bit more clever adjudication and balancing than the RAW, but I think it [b]is[/b] a good idea. OTOH, at least the quasi-unified mechanic of 3.X D&D means that this system -could- be used. There was simply no mechanic for it in 1e/2e, unless you want to count the largely non-functional NWP's from 2e AD&D; frankly, everybody I knew that didn't just use their wizard/priest slots for languages and history or their rogue picks for Tumbling went with Bowyer/Fletcher (because only the bow was worth using as a ranged weapon), Blind-Fighting (because it always worked), and Tracking. Anything else was a pointless flavor skill you'd never, ever use. And if you did somehow use them, you had to have the modifier to the appropriate attribute on hand and remember you're rolling under. Again, I know you're not claiming that 1e/2e was better than 3.X, just pointing out that the mechanics might not be as good as they could be. All I have to say in reply is "At least they look unified on the surface, particularly if you disregard damage". [/QUOTE]

Verification