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

[MerricB]

I have doubts the the majority of 1e games actually made use of henchmen in the way you describe.

See here:
http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20369&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Cheers!

 

[Ourph]

So any way you look at it, adhere to wealth guidelines or not, 3E offers more or at least the same as 1E. It's not logical to fault D&D for losing it's strict EL guide when giving different treasure, when 1E never had that EL guide to begin with.

I think the main difference here is that because CR/EL/WBL/XP etc. are so tightly meshed in 3e a DM who wants to change one aspect (but not the others) needs to consider his modifications more carefully than he would with AD&D where that interaction isn't a consideration. 1e controlled wealth and level pretty consistently by making the gaining of treasure the main factor in gaining XP. You really couldn't have an instance where you had a 10th level character who had never had two gold pieces to rub together because the mechanics of the game made GP and XP almost synonymous. With 3e, the gaining of XP and treasure have become seperated, but keeping them at consistent levels is still important to the way the game functions, so 3e DMs have more to consider when making modifications.

In other words you're gaining the benefits of more detailed guidance and a more integrated system, but you trade that for the inconvenience of doing more work when you want to change some of the parameters without affecting the rest.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

You do realize that MLB lowered the pitcher's mound in 1969 to give the hitters more of chance to hit the long ball?

Yes, I am aware of that, and it was a stupid rule change, falling right in there with darkness making light.

And you must not watch much professional basketball, because the rules for that game are constantly changing.

Rule changes are not neccessarily bad. Changing something fundamental just to make it easier on the players is. One poster said something to the effect that a random dice roll should not result in a character death. Taking the fear of pc death out of the game is basicly the same as lowering the rim to 8 feet, giving hitters 5 strikes, etc. But please, if you have fun playing a game with no consequences for unwise actions or unlucky rolls, go right ahead. Without risk, there is no reward.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Your "Gotcha monster" cry is a total straw man. I have never, never heard a 3e player utter such a whine

Not even in this thread?

 

[Raven Crowking]

Even as a teenager, I alway appreciated the fact that the 1E manuals did not talk down to me, did not try to cater to the lowest common denominator, and vastly increased the range of my own vocabulary (even though it caused me to wear out the family dictionary almost as quickly as I wore out my original set of rulebooks). If that is somehow "elitist", the world could do with a bit more of it, IMO.

Quoted for Truth.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Why do all Dwarven magic items have to be divinely-created? Why aren't Dwarves allowed to study how to craft and enchant these items on their own?

Let's not lay this design element at Tolkein's door, though. In Tolkein, dwarves could and did cast spells. It is explicit that they made magical items, including magic doors, magic lettering, and magic toys. It is explicit that Thorin Oakenshield and Gandalf both cast spells to protect the troll's gold they buried.


RC

 

[Numion]

I think the main difference here is that because CR/EL/WBL/XP etc. are so tightly meshed in 3e a DM who wants to change one aspect (but not the others) needs to consider his modifications more carefully than he would with AD&D where that interaction isn't a consideration. 1e controlled wealth and level pretty consistently by making the gaining of treasure the main factor in gaining XP. You really couldn't have an instance where you had a 10th level character who had never had two gold pieces to rub together because the mechanics of the game made GP and XP almost synonymous. With 3e, the gaining of XP and treasure have become seperated, but keeping them at consistent levels is still important to the way the game functions, so 3e DMs have more to consider when making modifications.

And how can it be easier to control* a system where Gold = Xp than separate Xp and treasure? In 1e you're stuck in a very rigid level / gold formula, because whatever treasure you give, up goes the Xp. It's like the DM has no choice at all - in 3E the choice exists, and it comes with the warning that the usual EL thingy might not work as expected. I think having a system (with caveats) for that is a bonus when comparing to no system at all. You're faulting 3E for losing what 1E has never had when someone alters the wealth they put out.

Well, ok, I guess "no control at all" is the easiest system to control, because it involves no decisions at all.

This is interesting stuff, nonetheless.

 

[Numion]

Quoted for Truth.

Better someone pick up a D&D book and put it down because of Garys yarns, instead of becoming a gamer? I understand that the elite needs to be exclusive to stay the elite, but I consider the health of the hobby more important than basking in my own superiority. YMMV.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Sure, it's part of the game, but I think it's better when the players can attribute severe consequences to mistakes on their part, rather than just some random event.

I think you will be happy when 6e comes out, then, and you no longer use dice.


RC

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Better someone pick up a D&D book and put it down because of Garys yarns, instead of becoming a gamer? I understand that the elite needs to be exclusive to stay the elite, but I consider the health of the hobby more important than basking in my own superiority. YMMV.

Gimme a break. I doubt that happened often at all.