D&D 3E: the Death of Imagination?

[Berk]

Try telling my players that. They know that the rulebook is always right.

Actually they don't if they don't know that your words are the rules. Henry said it right, read em that paragraph in the preface. If they think the rulebook is always right then that paragraph will shatter their poor fragile minds.

 

[barsoomcore]

3E isn't DM-friendly until and unless you bitchslap it into being DM-friendly.

I can definitely agree with THAT! Yeah, baby!

 

[Forrester]

I can definitely agree with THAT! Yeah, baby!

You know, I really like that line . Unfortunately, there's no room for it in my .sig!

 

[Arnwyn]

I'm also going out and buying Robin Laws' book. Wow, that's good stuff.

...except the fact that the guy seems to have the vocabulary of a 5-year old. Did he actually use the term "crunchy" in a published product? That's sad. He's got great insights, though.

 

[Psion]

Next game, shoot one player per hour until they accept your authority as DM.

Hello, .sig!

 

[Storminator]

...except the fact that the guy seems to have the vocabulary of a 5-year old. Did he actually use the term "crunchy" in a published product? That's sad. He's got great insights, though.

What's so sad about it? He used it properly.

You pitch your writing to your audience. The book is a very good read.

PS

 

[Psion]

While 3e is a great system, it is a little rules intensive. Sure, its been streamlined but all the skills and feats make the game seem mechanical. Last night with my bard/rogue character I went around gathering information. I wanted to roleplay it out a little. But the DM rolled for the checks.

And the problem is the rules?

The core system is very flexible. There is no one way to use it, and is very adaptable.

If a rogue picked a lock or climbed a wall, you would want to know things like the quality of the lock or wall, the tool used, and the conditions (a rain slicked wall is harder to climb than a dry one, etc.)

So when the character gatehers information, the DM should ask for how you go about it, where you look, and describe your interactions and set the DCs accordingly. That's where the roleplaying comes in.

The rules specifically provide for this sort of open play... see "the DMs best friend."

It sounds as if the culprit here is GM inexperience, not "the rules" as you blame.

 

[takyris]

My group has been playing D&D since 3rd Edition came out. We've gotten steadily better at the rules over the years, and we're now at the point where most of us know how to make things work. We're past a critical point that I am making up a name for on the spot: The Equal Reality Point.

The Equal Reality Point is the point in which a player is able to read between the lines of a given rule system and apply normal reality to the rules.

For example:

Beginning player: What do you mean I can't draw my sword and take a full attack? I just got to +6/+1! This rule system blows!

Competent player: Okay, I draw my sword as a move-equivalent action and take a single attack as my standard.

Equal Reality player: I stumble forward, jerking my sword from its sheath and trying to catch the guardsman by surprise as I do.

Each of those players had the same character, a 6th level fighter without Quick Draw. But the Equal Reality player understands the rules and has stopped whining about the ones he doesn't like. What's more, he can actually describe what he's doing as non-game-term actions, and the other players in the group are experienced enough to know that he's within the rules. The only time that the rules need to enter the picture is if there's a question, which grows less and less often as group cohesiveness improves.

This can get tricky, because without your players spelling it out for you, you have to trust them. When Kradge declares that he's taking "Massive, reckless swings," does that mean he's power attacking? If Kradge's player is the kind of guy who only announced whether he was power attacking after looking at his rolls, this is a problem. In order to get past the rules and return to a point of creativity, you have to be willing to trust your players.

And honestly, it's easier at lower levels. The most recent Big Fight my party engaged in was them, fully prepared, in an Unhallowed Dwarven Crypt, facing a pit fiend, two gelugons, a fire giant, two frost giants, four hill giants, eight ogres, five fiendish dire lions, and a half-fiend dire displacer beast (Dire Tiger with tentacles). Before the fight even began, the party had:

Mass Haste
Magic Circle Against Evil
Spell Resistance, for SR 27
Bless
Prayer
Spell Immunity: Fireball, Produce Flame, Wall of Flame
Protection from Elements: Fire
Cat's Grace
Bull's Strength

That was a ton of new numbers to keep track of -- the party had to back out of roleplaying mode for this combat and actually describe what they were doing and what they experienced. Saying "That cone of cold doesn't get past my SR" rather than "The cone of cold leaves me untouched, save for my cloak, which is lined with frost," and saying, "Okay, I hit AC 34, I THINK, is prayer still on?" instead of rolling, telling me the AC, looking for my body language to tell them hit or miss, and then describing their action with flavor text.

So, like I said, it's an ongoing process. In some ways, we're there. In other ways, we're getting their. Tom, you sound like I felt about half a year ago. I got tired of players questioning my decisions, and started doing more and more nasty stuff to them -- confounding them with as many templates and special powers as possible on a given monster, giving everything levels, etc. Then I realized that all I was doing was ratcheting up the arms race. After a few long talks, we're getting to the point where the players feel creative, I feel relaxed and unattacked, and we're working within the rules, so nobody gets preferential treatment for being arrogant or sucking up to the DM.

-Tacky

 

[Hardhead]

Overall, I disagree with the original poster. I really like 3e. But at the same time, I can see where he's coming from. Some people prefer less-cruchy/more DM-controlled games. I think it's just a matter of preference.

 

[William Ronald]

Psion wrote:

So when the character gatehers information, the DM should ask for how you go about it, where you look, and describe your interactions and set the DCs accordingly. That's where the roleplaying comes in.

Well written, Psion! I think that an experienced DM can encourage his players to role play such situations. The DM can, and arguably should, reward roleplaying such situations. For example, if a PC really goes to every inn and tavern in a big city to gather information, maybe reward the PC with a small bonus to his dice roll for truly good roleplaying. (Circumstance modifier for truly making it seem like his character has sore feet and a sore throat from running all over town.)

Forrester wrote:

3E isn't DM-friendly until and unless you bitchslap it into being DM-friendly. There can be problem players in any RPG setting, but the immense crunchiness of 3E makes it easier to be a problem player in some ways. Can we all agree on that?

True. We have to make the game friendly to DMs and players. I think sometimes the sheer scope of the rules and number of products can be intimidating. The key is to find what works for you and your group.

It is also crucial that players and DMs treat each other with respect. This is a game, not a political campaign or a war. If you have a disagreement, discuss it rationally. I try to discourage whining, as it tends to alienate people. The goal of the game is to have fun. Sometimes, this seems to get lost in the debates over rules. It should not be about whether the DM wins or the players win. What matters is that everyone has fun at the gaming table.

Tom, I hope that your campaign will get back on track. There has been a lot of good advice here that I hope DMs will take to heart.