Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Andre" data-source="post: 3254832" data-attributes="member: 25930">Yes, previous editions were more flexible, as the rules were less complete and detailed. The flexibility came from the very lack of rules, since more rules create more constraints when someone tries to modify the system to suit a particular playing style. Of course, the lack of rules also created limitations, as too many GM's were put in the role of game designer, for which most of us were not prepared.The designers of 3.x have admitted many times that they had certain goals in mind when crafting the new rules, one of which was to limit the damage an arbitrary GM could cause. Another was an assumption when balancing classes and challenges that magic would be plentiful. And we were constantly warned when the game came out to be careful about introducing house rules without first trying the game as is, since changing one rule usually had significant unintended consequences. In short, the 3.x game system was designed to work best for a particular type of play, while also trying (somtimes unsuccessfully) to keep enough flexibility to suit a wide variety of gamers.That said, if you're willing to do the work and your players trust you, a GM can use 3.x for many different play styles. Take a day or two to view the threads on these boards and you'll see that many (most?) are tweaking the game to some degree to match their preferences. Or, if you prefer, try out one of the new rules sets, ala Castles and Crusades or Iron Heroes to see if they better meet your needs.By the way, rules never (IMO) dictate a particular style or play, but they should and do encourage particular styles.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Andre, post: 3254832, member: 25930"] Yes, previous editions were more flexible, as the rules were less complete and detailed. The flexibility came from the very lack of rules, since more rules create more constraints when someone tries to modify the system to suit a particular playing style. Of course, the lack of rules also created limitations, as too many GM's were put in the role of game designer, for which most of us were not prepared. The designers of 3.x have admitted many times that they had certain goals in mind when crafting the new rules, one of which was to limit the damage an arbitrary GM could cause. Another was an assumption when balancing classes and challenges that magic would be plentiful. And we were constantly warned when the game came out to be careful about introducing house rules without first trying the game as is, since changing one rule usually had significant unintended consequences. In short, the 3.x game system was designed to work best for a particular type of play, while also trying (somtimes unsuccessfully) to keep enough flexibility to suit a wide variety of gamers. That said, if you're willing to do the work and your players trust you, a GM can use 3.x for many different play styles. Take a day or two to view the threads on these boards and you'll see that many (most?) are tweaking the game to some degree to match their preferences. Or, if you prefer, try out one of the new rules sets, ala Castles and Crusades or Iron Heroes to see if they better meet your needs. By the way, rules never (IMO) [b]dictate[/b] a particular style or play, but they should and do [b]encourage[/b] particular styles. [/QUOTE]

Verification