Does 3E/3.5 dictate a certain style of play?

[Crothian]

No? Remember the "Power Plays" from dragon magazine? Take this race, this class, and these two feats to get +12 to X at first level? And it wasn't just feasable within the rules, but actually suggested as a standard tactic by the designers.

No, I don't. I don't get Dragon. But even a few miner dragon articles I don't think equates to all this stuff. Good man Games also had Powergamers guide to Wizards or something. THere has been a few things but nothing I'm worried about.

 

[BryonD]

* Now lets look at these posts about how my 6th level character has AC 61 or whatever it is and tell me it's all the same.

If you are honestly making this comparison then "your experience" is greatly inadequate for this discussion and that is the root of the matter.

Yeah, there are ways to break 3X. No one has ever disputed that.
And frankly, if someone wants to play that way then good for them. I hope they have fun because that is all that matters.
But to act like it is something new to 3X is just absurd. In 3X you get a group of rules experts together on a forum to squeeze every drop of boost out of 10+ books. In 2E you go buy the latest "complete" book and pick a kit.

So you're wrong on two counts: 1) It ain't a 3X thing and 2) The extreme doesn't define the standard.

 

[Raven Crowking]

That's is because of prestige classes, options that were not in the erarly game. If they were the same problem would happen.

But they were not there, and that is the point. The increase in options means an increase in the ability to cherry pick options. When you look at the 1e powergaming examples from the posts above, you will note that they revolve around options introduced in Unearthed Arcana and/or Dragon Magazine. Adding those options then increased the capacity for powergaming, just as the plethora of options now increases the capacity for powergaming manyfold.

I argue that the tradeoff (more options vs. the potential of more powergaming) is worth it. After all, a good DM can nip that sort of thing in the bud (or work around it, or just have fun with it). I just think that the argument that the number of options doesn't increase the capacity for powergaming is pretty strange.

 

[molonel]

Just a minor point of interest, Shadeydm. How many 1st Edition AD&D characters have you played from 1st all the way to 20th in one single class?

 

[Shadeydm]

If you are honestly making this comparison then "your experience" is greatly inadequate for this discussion and that is the root of the matter.

Yeah, there are ways to break 3X. No one has ever disputed that.
And frankly, if someone wants to play that way then good for them. I hope they have fun because that is all that matters.
But to act like it is something new to 3X is just absurd. In 3X you get a group of rules experts together on a forum to squeeze every drop of boost out of 10+ books. In 2E you go buy the latest "complete" book and pick a kit.

So you're wrong on two counts: 1) It ain't a 3X thing and 2) The extreme doesn't define the standard.

Speaking of wrongness we were not talking about 2E but ADnD aka 1E.

Character optimaztion is achieved in 3xE via multiclassing and as has already been stated by others in this very post in 3.xE multiclassing is the norm. Therefore 3.xE encourages and rewards this behavior.

 

[Crothian]

I just think that the argument that the number of options doesn't increase the capacity for powergaming is pretty strange.

Who made that arguement?

 

[Shadeydm]

Just a minor point of interest, Shadeydm. How many 1st Edition AD&D characters have you played from 1st all the way to 20th in one single class?

To be totally honest I don't think there was a single class that had 20 levels but its been a while so I might be wrong. But I can tell you in all honesty that in ADnD single classing was the norm in my experience multiclassing was rare and usually done due to lack of a certain class in the party.

 

[Crothian]

Character optimaztion is achieved in 3xE via multiclassing and as has already been stated by others in this very post in 3.xE multiclassing is the norm. Therefore 3.xE encourages and rewards this behavior.

It encourages mutli classing becasue it is so easy. However, it does not reward it or does is have anything to do with character optimaztion. If multi classing was rewarded, all multi class options would be better then a non multi classes character and this is clearly not true. Multi classing can be used to achieve powerful characters but at the same time it can also be used to create weak characters.

 

[Psion]

Perhaps this is the crux of my problem with the state of the game in 3.xE.

I wondered why you were agreeing with my until I noticed my typo. I find single class characters to be the norm. Far more so than in 1e, for which you could make excellent combos like fighther/magic user/thieves.

In my first 3e game, we had no multiclass characters.
My second, long-running 3e campaign featured 1 multiclass character out of 6 or so.

 

[billd91]

Character optimaztion is achieved in 3xE via multiclassing and as has already been stated by others in this very post in 3.xE multiclassing is the norm. Therefore 3.xE encourages and rewards this behavior.

That's not really a good syllogism. Speeding is the norm on our highways yet the police discourage and penalize the behavior as does your gas mileage.
Like speeding, there are trade-offs to multiclassing in 3E. You get some results you want but, since base classes now tend to receive some benefits throughout their 20 levels, you give up other ones.