Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Does pathfinder strike anyone as too gamey?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6194326" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Be toughter relative to comparable HD monsters, because (i) they use d8s, (ii) they don't get CON to hp, (iii) they don't get STR to damage (nor to hit, but at least through mid levels they have a slightly better to hit matrix) and (iv) they don't get DEX to AC or magic armour to saves.</p><p></p><p>These are all in addition to the "better saving throws in AD&D than 3E" that you conceded to [MENTION=16586]Campbell[/MENTION] upthread.</p><p></p><p>A 3E spell caster has a "spell component pouch". Why can't a 3E archer have a "quiver"?</p><p></p><p>In other words, it's not inherent in the rules that all these matters of detail be dealt with.</p><p></p><p>Even if all a wizard could do was Spider Climb, Hold Portals, turn Invisible, Fly etc they would still be pretty potent. (Arguably as potent as a classic D&D thief.) The ability to do area damage on top of that is gravy. The unique ability to deliver status effects and debuffs isn't needed to balance their numbers, in my experience. It pushes them in the other direction.</p><p></p><p>In my view this is purely a function of system. For instance, in Runequest or Rolemaster "me and my sword only" still includes debuffs and status effects, via the crit rules. In HARP or Burning Wheel, "me and my sword only" includes using Fate Points to boost your attack roll. In 2nd ed AD&D, "Me and My Sword Only" includes 3/2 attacks at 1st level, which is unattainable for a (pre-UA) 1st ed AD&D fighter.</p><p></p><p>The notion that one of these system conceits is the basis for a point of pride, and that the other is like doping (to use the analogy from upthread) is something I just find ridiculous. Is the HD increase for fighters between earlier D&D and AD&D (from d8 to d10 - and the d8 itself was a systematisation, I'm guessing in the Greyhawk supplement, of the weird d6 rules in Men & Magic) a form of cheating? It's fetishising mechanics that have no inherent meaning.</p><p></p><p>Seriously? In the 4e PHB, to find a fighter power that dazes I have to go to 13th level (Anvil of Doom, single target attack vs AC for 2W & dazed (stunned if the weapon is a hammer or mace). (There's also a Pit Fighter power at 11th, that dazes on a successful secondary attack; and the warlord gets a 3W power otherwise similar to the fighter's at 17th.) The wizard, at 3rd level, gets colour spray - a close blast 5 vs Will for 1d6 and dazed. There's no comparison.</p><p></p><p>I don't have a strong view on whether fighters or wizards are better in combat in 4e (though I would hope that fighters are, given that - between skills and rituals - wizards are noticably better out of combat). But I just don't understand how you can say that a fighter and a wizard are no different except in base numbers, given their radically different abilitites to impose status and debuff effects (of which I've just given one example).</p><p></p><p>I think the general idea is that you use a bag of holding, or Heward's Haversack, or some other self-crafted item that enables you to easily call desired objects to hand while making sure those objects don't count against your encumbrance.</p><p></p><p>(Also, encumbrance is a tedious rule to have to bring to bear to rein a character in.)</p><p></p><p>I don't mind that sort of game but would never use D&D for it.</p><p></p><p>This is why 3E has never really appealed to me. It's a mixture of gonzo (eg hit points) and gritty (eg skill rules) that strikes me as inherently unstable for a wide range of approaches. And recurring threads like these don't dissuade me from that impression!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6194326, member: 42582"] Be toughter relative to comparable HD monsters, because (i) they use d8s, (ii) they don't get CON to hp, (iii) they don't get STR to damage (nor to hit, but at least through mid levels they have a slightly better to hit matrix) and (iv) they don't get DEX to AC or magic armour to saves. These are all in addition to the "better saving throws in AD&D than 3E" that you conceded to [MENTION=16586]Campbell[/MENTION] upthread. A 3E spell caster has a "spell component pouch". Why can't a 3E archer have a "quiver"? In other words, it's not inherent in the rules that all these matters of detail be dealt with. Even if all a wizard could do was Spider Climb, Hold Portals, turn Invisible, Fly etc they would still be pretty potent. (Arguably as potent as a classic D&D thief.) The ability to do area damage on top of that is gravy. The unique ability to deliver status effects and debuffs isn't needed to balance their numbers, in my experience. It pushes them in the other direction. In my view this is purely a function of system. For instance, in Runequest or Rolemaster "me and my sword only" still includes debuffs and status effects, via the crit rules. In HARP or Burning Wheel, "me and my sword only" includes using Fate Points to boost your attack roll. In 2nd ed AD&D, "Me and My Sword Only" includes 3/2 attacks at 1st level, which is unattainable for a (pre-UA) 1st ed AD&D fighter. The notion that one of these system conceits is the basis for a point of pride, and that the other is like doping (to use the analogy from upthread) is something I just find ridiculous. Is the HD increase for fighters between earlier D&D and AD&D (from d8 to d10 - and the d8 itself was a systematisation, I'm guessing in the Greyhawk supplement, of the weird d6 rules in Men & Magic) a form of cheating? It's fetishising mechanics that have no inherent meaning. Seriously? In the 4e PHB, to find a fighter power that dazes I have to go to 13th level (Anvil of Doom, single target attack vs AC for 2W & dazed (stunned if the weapon is a hammer or mace). (There's also a Pit Fighter power at 11th, that dazes on a successful secondary attack; and the warlord gets a 3W power otherwise similar to the fighter's at 17th.) The wizard, at 3rd level, gets colour spray - a close blast 5 vs Will for 1d6 and dazed. There's no comparison. I don't have a strong view on whether fighters or wizards are better in combat in 4e (though I would hope that fighters are, given that - between skills and rituals - wizards are noticably better out of combat). But I just don't understand how you can say that a fighter and a wizard are no different except in base numbers, given their radically different abilitites to impose status and debuff effects (of which I've just given one example). I think the general idea is that you use a bag of holding, or Heward's Haversack, or some other self-crafted item that enables you to easily call desired objects to hand while making sure those objects don't count against your encumbrance. (Also, encumbrance is a tedious rule to have to bring to bear to rein a character in.) I don't mind that sort of game but would never use D&D for it. This is why 3E has never really appealed to me. It's a mixture of gonzo (eg hit points) and gritty (eg skill rules) that strikes me as inherently unstable for a wide range of approaches. And recurring threads like these don't dissuade me from that impression! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Does pathfinder strike anyone as too gamey?
Top