[EDITION WARZ] Selling Out D&D's Soul?

[Philotomy Jurament]

When converting over to 3e, we converted over to hex maps as well. The posts ended up in all kinds of weird places relative to the hex grid. So we deleted them. The posts have not been missed.

Just one more way that 3e is infinitely superior to everything that ever can before and ever will come henceforth.

That has to be the most coherent and valid "3E rulez" argument I've ever read. It explains everything!

I still hate Hungry Hungry Hippos, though.

 

[Thurbane]

Now, there were LOTS of people who probably played with no alterations whatsoever -- using weapon speeds, using weapon vs. armor type, using the grappling rules, using Staves of the Magi and ROds of Lordly Might, Decks of many things, using the initiative rules from 1E exactly as written, etc. -- but I really haven't seen them, and none of the people so far who have replied have said they did, either. Even if some did, it's still a minority compared to the many who did..

Mark me (and my group) down as one of them.

In fact, one of the first things we all commented on after switching to 3.5 was "Where are the weapon speeds? What's the point in using a dagger these days?".

 

[Thurbane]

I have yet to find a situation under 3.x that I didn't experience in whole or part under every previous edition of the game I've played. Rules discussions? Check. Improvisation? Check. House-Rules? Check. Rules Lawyers? Check. Power Gamers? Check. Drama Queens? Check.

FUN? DOUBLE-CHECK.

Quoted for truth. Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Thurbane]

Sorry to triple post, but I want to make an additonal point:

I and my group personally found 1E and more particularly 2E perfect playable exactly by the RAW, with the possible over-used exception of unarmed combat. The only house rules we added were added for personal taste, not because we thought the system was fundamentally broken.

Also, to say or imply that 3.X is more fun than 1E or 2E simply by virtue of the completeness or coherence of rules is like saying that a book on copyright laws is more fun to read than Terry Pratchett novel - it is totally subjective to the individual, and not "provable" as such.

 

[Numion]

What's the point in using a dagger these days?".

You can throw it?

 

[diaglo]

You can throw it?

you could throw it in 1edADnD too.

heck. take the dart. why use one in the newest edition. yet in 2edADnD with the Complete...nevermind. forget the dart. Dodge didn't know how to make a car. EVAR.


diaglo "a Chevy mang" Ooi

 

[Mark CMG]

In fact, one of the first things we all commented on after switching to 3.5 was "Where are the weapon speeds? What's the point in using a dagger these days?".

I guess you had yet to have a character swallowed whole, eh?

 

[Kormydigar]

However, they had just previously fought 3 Glabrezu Demons and 4 Hezrou demons, 10 minutes in game-time before, and came through that fight with more scratches than this one. Plus, isn't an encounter 3 or 4 levels above supposed to be a "very challenging" encounter? I understand there's lots of variables, but my point is that, under 3.5, using boatloads of splats, the fights really haven't been challenging at all. No unconscious people, no loads of spell power used, no "riding the raggedy edge," etc. It's definitely harder to engineer a challenging but winnable encounter these days. Most of the time, it just gets to be them telling me it was a hard battle, but they didn't use one ounce of their reserves.

Unfortunately for us all unless your group consists of Lidda,Tordek, Mialee, and Jozan those CR guidelines are nowhere near accurate.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Unfortunately for us all unless your group consists of Lidda,Tordek, Mialee, and Jozan those CR guidelines are nowhere near accurate.

Adding lots of splatbooks has the predictable effect of stepping up the PC power level relative to vanilla monsters when used by players who choose to go for it. People have been grousing about that since Unearthed Arcana in the olden days.

Heck, diaglo has probably been grousing about power creep for even longer.

The CR guidelines still provide useful information, you just cannot use them at face value.

 

[MerricB]

In my experience, I just had 5 15th level PC's beat the living snot out of a Marilith demon (CR 17) fully spell-enhanced and a Deathshrieker (CR 15) and 3 CR 7 underlings with only two PCs wounded (one pretty badly, one minorly).

Err... We're talking about an EL 17 or 18 encounter with a PC group that is close to APL 16. Especially if they're stronger that 25-point buy, I'd assess them as APL 16. That makes the encounter only +1 or +2.

The CR 7 underlings are cannon fodder. They won't contribute much. So, the Marilith and the Deathshrieker are the foes of note.

Unfortunately for us all unless your group consists of Lidda,Tordek, Mialee, and Jozan those CR guidelines are nowhere near accurate.

Actually, they're pretty accurate. If I send a bunch of 10th level characters against a CR 20 monster, I know what the result is likely to be. The question is what the tolerance of CR is. Generally, I think CR is accurate within +/- 1, although high-level adds so many variables that it begins to become less accurate, but +/- 2 even at the higher levels is probably about right.

What is probably essential is that not all of the encounters are of the same type. If, for instance, you always used low-AC, high-HP melee types against your party, then those encounters all share enough similarity that their CR modification would be the same. If, however, over a number of encounters you used a combination of meleeists, high AC guys, spell-users, and such, although each effective EL might vary a bit, the average EL would be much closer to true.

Note that Wizards, in their climactic encounters in adventures, often use APL+4. Henry's example isn't even close to that.

Cheers!