Discontinuity: 3e and D&D

[hong]

No argument here. I've always been of the opinion that the numbers get so big that the system starts to break down in the mid teens, and dies on its posterior around 17th level. Honestly, when a monster has +28 to hit, you're really just rolling to see if you crit or automiss.

Psst. 1) Power Attack; 2) Iterative attacks.

 

[JamesDJarvis]

I see what you're saying, James, but I don't agree. I disliked those assumptions built into the earlier editions. Very rarely did any group I've played with ever utilized those rules.

Like Isaid D&D has changed. Like it or not the game was written for a different set of assumptions then and now. I myself don't think it is so radical that the game isn't D&D anymore, I think it is truer that the core game now is but a subset of what the core game was years ago.

 

[JamesDJarvis]

Plot is plot is plot.

Plot is a fictional device , I like to play games. As DM I'm much happier building a setting where the players get to romp about in and contribute to, over being railroaded along a predefined plot.

Don't complain that now that 3E is out you can't do any of these things.

I wasn't complaining I was pointing out it was built into the rules in earlier editions in a manner it is not built into the game now, not a complaint. I was pointing out how the game has changed.

 

[fanboy2000]

I wasn't complaining. I was pointing out it was built into the rules in earlier editions in a manner it is not built into the game now, not a complaint.

Of course, there is the Leadership feat. Playing a game where the players play heros who attract followers over time as they game levels is no more difficult in 3e than it is under earlier editions. We can argue over such intangables as assumptions untill we're blue in the face, but the rules easily support PCs growing in influence and rank.

 

[JamesDJarvis]

Of course, there is the Leadership feat.

Which isn't a class feature, the results of the leadership feat aren't specifically tied to a class and isn't explicitly tied to any other campaign activity. Characters aren't expected to settle down and become part of the ruling class. It isn't the same thing.

And I'll warrant an experienced DM and experienced players familiar with that older style of charcater and campaign development will have much less difficulty then those unfamiliar with such a style of play not really developed within the core rules.

It isn't an unsurmountable problem, it isn't a complaint that i raise but an indication of how the editions of the game actualy are different.

 

[Ds Da Man]

Maybe...just maybe....1st edition D&D is 1st edition D&D, and 2nd Edition D&D is second editon D&D, and maybe 3rd editon D&D is 3rd edition D&D. Kinda like the Ford Mustang and Chevy Corvette, change the body...engine...frame....wheel size, but still called a mustang or corvette.

 

[fanboy2000]

Which isn't a class feature, the results of the leadership feat aren't specifically tied to a class and isn't explicitly tied to any other campaign activity. Characters aren't expected to settle down and become part of the ruling class. It isn't the same thing.

True, it isn't the same thing, but your original post implied that it wasn't there at all. Also, why should PCs be expected to join the ruling class? The Leadership feat makes that kind of play posible, but not mandatory. Could you elaborate what other rules you need? The Leadership feat gives number of followers, and their level. It's tied to level and charisma, which make a great deal more sence to me than tieing it just to level. Most everything else is roleplaying. Deeds, titles, and such are things that I would would rather work out with my players because landownership and ruling over subjects is something that will vary from setting to setting.

 

[Pants]

So.... because the new DMG doesn't have a 'Wandering Prostitute' table, it's not D&D anymore?

 

[fanboy2000]

Umm. Hey, uh, pants. I'm just curious, really....what edition of D&D had the wandering prostitutes table?

I'm just curious.

Really.

Please belive me.

 

[Pants]

Umm. Hey, uh, pants. I'm just curious, really....what edition of D&D had the wandering prostitutes table?

I'm just curious.

Really.

Please belive me.

1e DMG. pg. 192

*rolls dice*
A 78? An Expensive Doxy!