D&D 3E: the Death of Imagination?
- Thread starter Tom Cashel
- Start date
- Status
Tom Cashel
First Post
William Ronald said:
Indeed! I've been talking with my players and I think we can make a go of it. Like so many other things in life, it comes down to mutual understanding and trust.
Gaming groups are like relationships...except there's six people involved.
hunter2112
First Post
What is the Climb DC for someone to climb an angry Cloud Giant?
25, assuming that it's clothed, and climbing someone draws an attack of opportunity. (just a few more to get 10)
I was going to post something insightful about my having gone through this last year but pretty much everything I would have said has been said already. Suffice to say, when I went through it, i actually quit playing. I had been gaming prettly much weekly (though there were occasional gaps) for nearly 14 years and was in 2 seperate groups and I just walked away in disgust at all the bitching about the rules. Didn't play again for 6 months. Eventually though I realized that it wasn't the sytem, it was the people playing it. They had gotten out of control and nobody was playing a character, they wre running a set of stats, nothing more. Oddly enough after I left, both groups died out. I'm not conceited enough to think that I was the only thing keeping those game running but I did find it interesting that after the only guy to still be trying to play a person rather than scores on a sheet left, gaming in my little corner of the world stopped altogether.
When I came back it was as the DM and I made it clear that whoever came to my table had to understand that I was going to be running a much different type of game than we had been doing before. Nobody could play unless they had both goals for the PC, and goals AS the PC. More to it than that of course but I'm not getting into all my house rules here.
What I've learned from all this is that a character is not a set of stats on a sheet. Those are merely there to let you determine the outcome of a few certain instances. They are not your character. You should be able to make pretty much the same PC in pretty much any system, regardless of the ruleset. It's not that your fighter can use cleave and whirlwind attack and so forth, your fighter is a "great swordsman". You make make a "great swordsman" in many different systems. In my current game, one player was running a pure fighter with a Cha of 8, but he and I were able to roleplay some great moments and he was developing himself as a merchant kind of guy. We didn't care about the rules we just had fun with the scene. So what if he didn't have Diplomacy to try and out-roll the guy, he just out-talked me.
To echo the main suggestion so far. Take a break. It'll do you a world of good.
I could go on and on but ...
25, assuming that it's clothed, and climbing someone draws an attack of opportunity. (just a few more to get 10)
I was going to post something insightful about my having gone through this last year but pretty much everything I would have said has been said already. Suffice to say, when I went through it, i actually quit playing. I had been gaming prettly much weekly (though there were occasional gaps) for nearly 14 years and was in 2 seperate groups and I just walked away in disgust at all the bitching about the rules. Didn't play again for 6 months. Eventually though I realized that it wasn't the sytem, it was the people playing it. They had gotten out of control and nobody was playing a character, they wre running a set of stats, nothing more. Oddly enough after I left, both groups died out. I'm not conceited enough to think that I was the only thing keeping those game running but I did find it interesting that after the only guy to still be trying to play a person rather than scores on a sheet left, gaming in my little corner of the world stopped altogether.
When I came back it was as the DM and I made it clear that whoever came to my table had to understand that I was going to be running a much different type of game than we had been doing before. Nobody could play unless they had both goals for the PC, and goals AS the PC. More to it than that of course but I'm not getting into all my house rules here.
What I've learned from all this is that a character is not a set of stats on a sheet. Those are merely there to let you determine the outcome of a few certain instances. They are not your character. You should be able to make pretty much the same PC in pretty much any system, regardless of the ruleset. It's not that your fighter can use cleave and whirlwind attack and so forth, your fighter is a "great swordsman". You make make a "great swordsman" in many different systems. In my current game, one player was running a pure fighter with a Cha of 8, but he and I were able to roleplay some great moments and he was developing himself as a merchant kind of guy. We didn't care about the rules we just had fun with the scene. So what if he didn't have Diplomacy to try and out-roll the guy, he just out-talked me.
To echo the main suggestion so far. Take a break. It'll do you a world of good.
I could go on and on but ...
John Smallberries
First Post
Here's what I expect from a good 3e DM:
1. Define the sandbox.
Tell us what rules & supplements you are allowing in the game. Define all House Rules beforehand.
2. Populate the sandbox.
Provide the setting and plot information. Write interesting EL appropriate encounters, both combat or roleplaying. Be prepared.
3. Let us play in the sandbox.
You play the NPCs and monsters, but let us define and develop our characters. Adjudicate the rules, don't break them (or even bend them too much).
In my opinion, a good 3e DM is simply another player in a game with rules and boundaries that everyone must abide by.
For that reason, 3e is the best RPG I have ever played, and I have even more fun running it than playing it.
1. Define the sandbox.
Tell us what rules & supplements you are allowing in the game. Define all House Rules beforehand.
2. Populate the sandbox.
Provide the setting and plot information. Write interesting EL appropriate encounters, both combat or roleplaying. Be prepared.
3. Let us play in the sandbox.
You play the NPCs and monsters, but let us define and develop our characters. Adjudicate the rules, don't break them (or even bend them too much).
In my opinion, a good 3e DM is simply another player in a game with rules and boundaries that everyone must abide by.
For that reason, 3e is the best RPG I have ever played, and I have even more fun running it than playing it.
I agree to agree AND disagree.
I left AD&D because I felt the game constrained my imagination, too much house ruling to get a unique world up an going as well as a lot of "fluff" for the game rules didn't hold water with me.
I played a lot of different games, mostly Storyteller because almost any house rule you made seemed to add, not detract from the game. My style is pretty loose anyway. Then 3e came along and I got a weird surprise.
At first, 3e seemed to be a godsend, I could "lure" players to my table with the DnD rules, but the new flexibility of the system would let me build words my way (I could either house rule elves into racial limits or leave things stand to get Dwarven Rune Casters.) On this point, the game didn't disappoint at all.
But the learning curve, even without AoOs and minis was a lot longer than I thought it would be. I don't know if I would have DnD be the first game someone would DM. ... And I was also getting some burn out on juggling the rules. But then something cool happened.
I got Mutants and Masterminds. There is enough crunchy stuff that handle a TON! of flexibilty, yet the guidelines say you must use "common sense" above all else and the Power Source rules are a perfect example. Every power has to have a listed "Power Source" of why the PC has the power. If you have an Energy Blast that is a Mutation then a antimutegen made cancel your power out, or if it is Mystical, an anti-magic area will negate the power.
I am exaggerating but that is the gist.
I left AD&D because I felt the game constrained my imagination, too much house ruling to get a unique world up an going as well as a lot of "fluff" for the game rules didn't hold water with me.
I played a lot of different games, mostly Storyteller because almost any house rule you made seemed to add, not detract from the game. My style is pretty loose anyway. Then 3e came along and I got a weird surprise.
At first, 3e seemed to be a godsend, I could "lure" players to my table with the DnD rules, but the new flexibility of the system would let me build words my way (I could either house rule elves into racial limits or leave things stand to get Dwarven Rune Casters.) On this point, the game didn't disappoint at all.
But the learning curve, even without AoOs and minis was a lot longer than I thought it would be. I don't know if I would have DnD be the first game someone would DM. ... And I was also getting some burn out on juggling the rules. But then something cool happened.
I got Mutants and Masterminds. There is enough crunchy stuff that handle a TON! of flexibilty, yet the guidelines say you must use "common sense" above all else and the Power Source rules are a perfect example. Every power has to have a listed "Power Source" of why the PC has the power. If you have an Energy Blast that is a Mutation then a antimutegen made cancel your power out, or if it is Mystical, an anti-magic area will negate the power.
I am exaggerating but that is the gist.
Hi there,
this is an interesting discussion. I think both views have some merits.
1. D&D has a special flavor that no other game has. This invites roleplaying and - guess what - most of us got started with that game.
2. D&D has a very strict rules set and some very limited , which can be experienced as limiting. Don`t bother, take what you like and leave the rest to the rules nirvana.
But: the D&D rules are not as inspiring as e.g. the rules of 7th sea or l5r
One example: In D&D there are rules to reduce the amount of roleplaying (sense motive etc.) in other games there are rules for enhancing it (Arcana in 7seas).
3.D&D is a kind of "my first love" thing (don`t know the english term) . In a way the first roleplaying experiences stay the most interesting and contain nice memories. D&D provides just that. and lot`s of opportunties for roleplaying, too.
4. too many rules (like those for the prestige class) - aka specialisation reduce the flexibility of the game. it also defines (indirectly) what other characters cannot do. especially in a class based system.
Often specialisation defines the PC by what he/she (i have this and that ability) can do and not through what she is as a person(thinks, feels, motivations etc.). Although a good prestige class contain both approaches.
5.my experience: too strict rules can encourage power-gaming not vice versa.
Cheers
eed_De
this is an interesting discussion. I think both views have some merits.
1. D&D has a special flavor that no other game has. This invites roleplaying and - guess what - most of us got started with that game.
2. D&D has a very strict rules set and some very limited , which can be experienced as limiting. Don`t bother, take what you like and leave the rest to the rules nirvana.
But: the D&D rules are not as inspiring as e.g. the rules of 7th sea or l5r
One example: In D&D there are rules to reduce the amount of roleplaying (sense motive etc.) in other games there are rules for enhancing it (Arcana in 7seas).
3.D&D is a kind of "my first love" thing (don`t know the english term) . In a way the first roleplaying experiences stay the most interesting and contain nice memories. D&D provides just that. and lot`s of opportunties for roleplaying, too.
4. too many rules (like those for the prestige class) - aka specialisation reduce the flexibility of the game. it also defines (indirectly) what other characters cannot do. especially in a class based system.
Often specialisation defines the PC by what he/she (i have this and that ability) can do and not through what she is as a person(thinks, feels, motivations etc.). Although a good prestige class contain both approaches.
5.my experience: too strict rules can encourage power-gaming not vice versa.
Cheers
eed_De
Desdichado
Hero
Gaak! All wrong! Scientific names must be in italics and you always capitalize the generic name but not the specific name. Thus, Trollicus goadicus. Sheesh! Doesn't anyone around here have any professional pride anymore?Dave Blewer said:
Tom, I agree 3E is rules-heavy. About 6 months ago, I found myself starting to feel burned-out with 3E. I started posting my frustrations about 3E, and I regret it now to some extent. I recently got the players to switch to a different game for awhile. But I think we are ready to come back to 3E now.
Maybe you just need a break for awhile.
When we first started playing 3E I was self-conscious about getting all the rules right. Sometimes my players would complain that I gave the NPC's too many actions etc (I hated that). Its irritating being corrected. Seems like that can happen more in 3E. The DM is just going to have to use assertiveness.
I like Sigil's advice about banning the books from the table during play. Spells might be a problem...I am going to consider the idea though. The other thing to consider is maybe getting the other players to DM an adventure and you play sometimes. Others have mentioned this.
Maybe you just need a break for awhile.
When we first started playing 3E I was self-conscious about getting all the rules right. Sometimes my players would complain that I gave the NPC's too many actions etc (I hated that). Its irritating being corrected. Seems like that can happen more in 3E. The DM is just going to have to use assertiveness.
I like Sigil's advice about banning the books from the table during play. Spells might be a problem...I am going to consider the idea though. The other thing to consider is maybe getting the other players to DM an adventure and you play sometimes. Others have mentioned this.
Christian Walker
First Post
Tom,
There is something to your post. For example, why do people need to know how every magic item is made? Magic items are now recipes, rather than objects of mystery and awe.
"The Lance of Sir Laurent? Oh, My wizard could make one just like it. Just an Item Creation Feat here, a few spells there, and presto!"
Feh.
My only other gripe with 3e is that the damn thing is starting to play more and more like Mage Knight. A wizzo staffer made the comment that 3e could just as easily be called 3D due to the growing importance of minis and battlemats. I want to play a role-playing game, not spend my time pouring over a battle mat, counting squares, setting up flank attacks, and what not. That's what I have Advanced Squad Leader for.
I feel that somewhere the use of minis went out of control and we're just one step away from clicky based Liddas.
And no, these comments should not be taken as "Christian hates 3e." I spend way too much money on my publication to hate the system.
There is something to your post. For example, why do people need to know how every magic item is made? Magic items are now recipes, rather than objects of mystery and awe.
"The Lance of Sir Laurent? Oh, My wizard could make one just like it. Just an Item Creation Feat here, a few spells there, and presto!"
Feh.
My only other gripe with 3e is that the damn thing is starting to play more and more like Mage Knight. A wizzo staffer made the comment that 3e could just as easily be called 3D due to the growing importance of minis and battlemats. I want to play a role-playing game, not spend my time pouring over a battle mat, counting squares, setting up flank attacks, and what not. That's what I have Advanced Squad Leader for.
I feel that somewhere the use of minis went out of control and we're just one step away from clicky based Liddas.
And no, these comments should not be taken as "Christian hates 3e." I spend way too much money on my publication to hate the system.
Last edited:
barsoomcore
Unattainable Ideal
Yeah, I chucked all that out the window the second I saw it. But then, I chucked the entire magic system at the same time so, like, um, there you go.Christian Walker said:
What's amusing is that Monte just posted an article on his site about how to turn the whole "miniature" basis off and get your players thinking without battlemats. Some good points in there, I thought.
You hate 3e, don't you? Admit it. You know you do.
- Status
Similar Threads
