Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5835783" data-attributes="member: 87792">Can I take them as authoritative?  You're doing it to 4e.I'm talking about core 3.X too.  The rule that NPCs and PCs use the same rules.  You, however, seem to not want to talk about Core 3.X but about BryonD 3.X.  These are not the same game.Or continue to claim that it's option C.  You are as a DM doing the work that the designers of 3.X <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />ed up.  The Monk in straight RAW 3.X is the load.  The monk in your custom version isn't.  But this is not what you play.  As DM you have to go in and fix the game.  You yourself admit it.I absolutely am not playing word games.  There is a significant difference between no safety net - i.e. things only go wrong when you make what the book judges to be a mistake, and greased rungs - i.e. things go wrong when you play exactly by the book.  The Monk is pathetic out of the box.  The fighter is simply weak.No they aren't. You say greatness.  I say design-incompetence.  And that you've redesigned 3.X drifts it from core 3.X.No, you now understand my position rather than are accidently mischaracterising it.  A good DM can make a good game out of just about anything.  I am separating the design from the DMing.  The design of the 3.X monk sucks.  The class is broken and is the load.  A good DM can make up for this or for any other shortcoming of the system.  And with the right writing, even Scrappy-doo can occasionally be useful.  This doesn't make Scrappy a good character.  (Actually Scrappy Doo is a bad example - he apparently saved Scooby Doo from cancellation).Yes, that is a mischaracterisation of my position.  You just nailed it.  I am not saying that your game doesn't exist.  I'm saying that you yourself acknowledge that you have done a lot of tuning and patching of 3.X.  This doesn't make it RAW 3.X.  This makes it BryonD D&D 3.X.  And the amount of tuning you needed to do shows the problems with 3.XRules/DM synergy to me means something else.   I don't reject rules/DM synergy.  There are many games I play that have them.  I reject the notion that "The DM must fix the game" is rules/DM synergy.  When there is synergy the DM is a better DM than he would be without the rules.  Dread has such synergy.  WFRP 3e has such synergy, the resolution mechanic drawing effects into the game.  3.X, from your own description, doesn't enhance you running the game, it forces you to do a lot of extra work to tune the system to make it the game you want.  Now, you could call this training.  But being forced to tune the game isn't synergy when there are already tuned games.You seem to think that "sink or swim" is the only method to teach.  It isn't.  And you had a community of DMs that grew up playing 1E.  But you also had a lot of players who would not DM under such a system.  I know a lot of the old school DMs I know casually mentioning that they were the only one at the table who wanted to DM.  In 4e I have never played at a table where fewer than 50% of the players DMd.  And the single hardest threshoold for DMing is the first adventure.Oh, absolutely.  But that is not what we have here.  I don't claim to be Satriani.  And I don't think you do either.  And 4E certainly isn't a $100 beater.  Nor is it a custom Ibanez.  What it is is a good mid-end guitar with tricks like robot-tuning.On the other hand, you seem to be saying that the ability to not just tune a guitar but to actually design and make your own custom guitar is essential to good DMing.  I reject this idea.</blockquote>

Verification