D&D 3E/3.5 D&D 3e to be changed to new d20 rules? 4e coming!

[Kirowan]

I think D&D is fine the way it is for high-powered fantasy, but dark fantasy also has an appeal to a significant fan base. If WOTC wants D&D to be "the" fantasy game, I think it would only be right for them to provide rules for the scaling of power levels; rules such as WP and DR for armor. I would also like newer editions of D&D to include a success level mechanic in combat. For example, for every point you beat the target's AC by, you score an extra point of damage. This would take care of the dagger vs. platemail thing and make combat less random.

I just want options; options for playing the game my way. I want options for playing in a dark setting where every 15th level character doesn't own 5 magical items, but one really significant item that adds to the character's concept. Just some thoughts.

 

[SableWyvern]

I think D&D is fine the way it is for high-powered fantasy, but dark fantasy also has an appeal to a significant fan base. If WOTC wants D&D to be "the" fantasy game, I think it would only be right for them to provide rules for the scaling of power levels; rules such as WP and DR for armor. I would also like newer editions of D&D to include a success level mechanic in combat. For example, for every point you beat the target's AC by, you score an extra point of damage. This would take care of the dagger vs. platemail thing and make combat less random.

I just want options; options for playing the game my way. I want options for playing in a dark setting where every 15th level character doesn't own 5 magical items, but one really significant item that adds to the character's concept. Just some thoughts.

Then buy one of the millions of non-WotC OGL products out there. Or make your own mods. No company is going to produce a game wherein you buy a couple core books and all desires are catered for.

WotC has, however, enabled every imaginable style of game to be produced, using the d20 engine, buy loosening their copyright. Chances are, if an outside company does something that becomes standard in the majority of games, WotC will take it on board and make it official. Until then, they're going to keep producing product that is readily identified with d&d as we know it.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

3e has been out for a very short while and people are already wanting a 4e! My group doesn't want the Starwars like mechanics, we don't want realistic combats, we want high fantasy and heroic action! AC is perfect the way it is, HP is perfect the way it is. I hope 3e is the last edition of D&D! It's definately the last I'll buy.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

And again, I really disagree. All of those are secondary to the way the game plays; that is what keeps players coming back. And that has everything to do with mechanics and the feel of the game that they help create.

I suspect we only disagree superficially.

I agree that the "feel" of the game keeps people coming back. But that is not necessarily the same thing as the mechanics being well designed.

What do I mean by "well designed"? I mean that the number and pages and complexity of the rules are as small as possible to give you a particular "feel". In other words, you are getting good bang for the buck, and consequently spending less time poring over rule mechanics.

In that respect AD&D 2e, Vampire, and Shadowrun are quite mediocre IMO. But the games succeeded anyway.

My guess is the "feel" of D&D is more how the power levels scale than necessarily anything to do with AC or HPs. At 1st level you can confidently take on 1 "mook". At 5th level you can probably take on 25 mooks. 100 mooks at 10th level, etc. That is a very strong power curve.

I have my doubts that DR armor would necessarily matter much one way or another in terms of the power curve. Obviously lots of details would need to be rewritten, but the mechanics are not necessarily going to be more complicated.

 

[mmadsen]

Exactly. And if you fiddle with the system, unless you are very careful you will shift that balance. Which is fine if that is what you want... but for many people (I'd venture a majority of the current players), the current balance is just right.

The majority thought Second Edition's balance was just right too -- or at least not worth modifying.

If your point is that throwing in radical new rules in the middle of a campaign can have unintended consequences and can mess up your game, we can agree. Obviously these things need playtesting. That doesn't mean we have the perfect system though.

You have to ask yourself if they is really a reason for doing all of this work if your intent isn't to move it away from being heroic fantasy.

This is exactly the notion I've been trying to dispell. You don't have to move away from heroic fantasy when you clean up the rules or make them more sensible.

Which is more heroic, 50 hit points or 20 hit points and +10 Defense?

I expect any 4e to have relatively minor tweaks.

Star Wars doesn't have the same large "installed base", but they certainly thought armor-as-DR was a minor tweak.

Lose what ground? Lose the ground they gained by 3e -- as you say, right there. What are you missing? There are lots of satisfied customers with the current feel and balance of 3e, but you think that they are going to want your version of "new coke."

So by continuing down the road that brought them new players and brought back many old players...they'll lose players? That doesn't follow.

 

[mmadsen]

All of those are secondary to the way the game plays; that is what keeps players coming back. And that has everything to do with mechanics and the feel of the game that they help create.

This may surprise you, but I agree -- to some extent. What D&D has always done well is recognize that it's a game. People don't want to simulate life as a medieval peasant; they want to roll dice, manage resources (hit points, magic spells, etc.), strategize a bit, etc.

Many more "realistic" games lost that notion of gameplay, and their realistic rules weren't much fun.

It's not an either-or proposition though.

 

[mmadsen]

Fine, point me to the characters in FOTR who wore plate armour. A knight is defined by their particular social class and relationship to the setting, not by their armour.

I don't know what you're getting at, but I'll address a few things.

First, no one ins Tolkien's Lord of the Rings is wearing plate armor -- or at least he never spells that out. He's pretty explicit about most warriors wearing mail (chain mail), and mithril mail seems top of the line.

Second, a knight is defined by his horse, at least historically. In most other languages this is pretty explicit: French - chevalier, Spanish - caballero, German - Ritter; they all mean "horseman" or "rider". And, of course, medieval heavy cavalry were shock troops in heavy armor wielding lances.

It's only later that knighthood became just a social class (as opposed to a social class defined by its warrior duties).

 

[Someguy]

Tosses in his hat...

I think, that it relies on the DM to better bring the abstraction to normal terms... Describe the hits as they really are, but the fighter does dodge them alittl, ubt as he fights, he gets "tired", it seems to work in My campaign...yoi jusrt need to describe what happens

 

[mmadsen]

I think, that it relies on the DM to better bring the abstraction to normal terms... Describe the hits as they really are, but the fighter does dodge them alittl, ubt as he fights, he gets "tired", it seems to work in My campaign...yoi jusrt need to describe what happens

This has been covered before, but "just describing what happens" doesn't work very well.

If a high-level Fighter has 100 hit points, then he can't be hit hard by a sword. Even a critical hit from an 18-Strength Fighter with Weapon Specialization (Longsword) is no big deal. He's merely grazed, no worse than a first-level Fighter taking one or two points of damage. But a healing potion that would bring a peasant back from death's doorstep won't even heal our heroic fighter's scratch.

The Vitality/Wound system introduces some complexity in order to keep hit points but work around some of the "wackiness". The Defense bonus introduces almost zero complexity and works much better than huge amounts of extra hit points.

 

[Psion]

So by continuing down the road that brought them new players and brought back many old players...they'll lose players? That doesn't follow.

Not at all. You just think that your way is "the road". "The road" they followed to get here was not morphing D&D into GURPS, as you seem to want. The "road" was to make the changes that were necessary and keep the aspects of the game that made it great.