Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Imp" data-source="post: 3765690" data-attributes="member: 40094">I only really really agree with #1 and #5 of Gentlegamer's list.&nbsp; Subsystems of AD&amp;D can &amp; have been taken out and added wholesale, but if you really change how combat works or you really change how magic works you are changing the core of the game.&nbsp; I guess I would also add &quot;changing how attributes work&quot; in that list, though I don't know many examples of people ever doing that.I find the &quot;humanocentric&quot; perception of AD&amp;D goes heavily against my experience (AD&amp;D humans: pretty useless unless you get to high levels, which is hard, and level caps were frequently houseruled out; 3e's implementation of humans took an enormous stride to make things humanocentric) – and trying to play monsters as PCs was pretty common in AD&amp;D, little though the system supported it.The number of people who wanted to play gold dragons, man...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Imp, post: 3765690, member: 40094"] I only really really agree with #1 and #5 of Gentlegamer's list. Subsystems of AD&D can & have been taken out and added wholesale, but if you really change how combat works or you really change how magic works you are changing the core of the game. I guess I would also add "changing how attributes work" in that list, though I don't know many examples of people ever doing that. I find the "humanocentric" perception of AD&D goes heavily against my experience (AD&D humans: pretty useless unless you get to high levels, which is hard, and level caps were frequently houseruled out; 3e's implementation of humans took an enormous stride to make things humanocentric) – and trying to play monsters as PCs was pretty common in AD&D, little though the system supported it. The number of people who wanted to play gold dragons, man... [/QUOTE]

Verification