Flavorless 3e- Advantage- players

[herald]

As a Gygaxian purist I used to hate this notion - PCs should be special! Even 1st level ones!
But really, 3e is so built around videogame paradigms that it suffers when those paradigms _aren't_ adhered to. In pretty much any MUD, persistent online world, or such, the NPC city guards are damn tough - they need to be or players will casually slaughter them. I increasingly think that gritty low-fantasy is actually much _better_ served by having powerful NPCs - like the Hell Hounds in the Thieves' World series - who are individually competent. I like old James Bond movies where Bond battles a single tough-nut Soviet trooper, or Conan stories where he battles a couple of city guardsmen. I'm a bit jaded on hero-slaughters-10,000-anime-mooks - and 3e's combat system really doesn't support such battles anyway, it's geared very much around small groups of comparably powerful combatants. I'm starting to think 3e-world works better if city guards are named individuals with the stats of say 5th level warriors than if they're encountered as platoons of 30 level-0ers with 4hp each.

I agree that Adventurers should be special, and infact that's why I'm giving them something that others don't have.

And Warriors should have some bite in them. To keep them at 1st level I feel nerfs the concept. Cohorts have to come from somewhere.

Let adventurers work up into thier powers.

 

[jasper]

BelenUmeria Actually, I think the girth of rules, in the form of "options," limit flavor and roleplaying……
Hmm setting first edition.
Hi I am Bob fifth level thief, I have a short sword, 3 daggers and lock picks. I from Kansas City
Hi I am Pirate Bob a fifth level thief, I have a short sword, 3 daggers and lock picks. I from Hawaii.
Patrolman PirateCat. All right you two thieves up against the wall.
Both- huh. What. We did do nothing..
PirateCat- Yea two guys with short swords and leather award in the downtown New York. You are under arrest.
First edition a thief was thief and you brought two because one would always miss a trap and get wasted.



And 3e consequences and detriments are really watered down. .. True.

What I am saying is that there used to be some RP effects to things such as resurrection....... On you the RS chance of failure… How many times have I seen it fail? Hmm 9+ and counting. SSS around 30. Oh So Chuck the Cleric needs a week to recover from raising Bob the Thief. Gee we hold up in this room for a week and a day.
Or the aging thing. Did most people worry about their PC age until they open a door and a ghost was on the other side.

So far I have no problems with your flavor rules works in any edition.

….it is fun to use such things as a character or story building concept…. True. In Any edition with players who care about it. Others want to hack giants all night long.

...but high level abilities in 3e tend to be about numbers alone…. Edit here drop in 3e. Ever see two fighters& two rangers( both 10+ level) once they hasted cut through a horde of giants in first edition or second edition.

Umbra .. These days, folks like "balance"….etc. And in the old days players wanted disadvantages… Oh please Mr. Pirate cat can I play a Drow. What do you mean the wood elves have bent four trees over and tie one of my limbs to each tree. I am pc you can’t kill me. Plus if a wear sunglasses and deep hood they can’t tell. No don’t know were you got all those high quality players back then or now. But most players I have came across want cool feats, magic etc and no disadvantages. What BelenUmeria is tiring to do in his world (not Greyhawk, realms etc) is make necromancers special. Oh god a DM with imagination and he wants to use it. Kill him.

Heh, fair enough. One thing I've learned is to DM only for people who I know I can trust. Doing otherwise just risks heartburn … very true Hong but ever the trust worthy ones some times will throw me for a loop.

Bellumeria continue working on the Taint thing. I am currently working on Magical Musketeer similar to the arcana archer but I will only be limiting it to people from one kingdom. If you want secondary spell effects similar to first edition (ex haste = SSS roll) go ahead and add them in. Type up a list on your computer and give your players those house rules additions. You will do more that some of my first edition DMs who had one pencil and paper list with only 1 copy. No problem here.


…It's the video game mentality that combat is the entire purpose of the game….
Gee my players back in 1980 had this mentality, all I had was pong but some of them had the Atari. Gee the video game mentality be around a while.

See my signature.

 

[WizarDru]

I have not gotten to high level 3.5 play yet. We just finished a 3e campaign, so I have not had experienced with the spell changes yet.

However, ability damage and diseases failed to affect the party in my last campaign after 7th level spells came into play.

Speaking as someone who's run high-level 3.0 and 3.5 games, and who is currently running a 3.5 Epic game, I can assure you, the opportunity cost alone of having to keep certain spells memorized is problematic. Vile damage has inconvienced the party more than once, and when they find themselves in a situation where resting isn't an option, and they're in dangerous territory (such as the Palace of Whispers, stronghold of the Githyanki queen) such effects can be troubling.

No effect, except an exceptional one, is going to be long lasting by the time 9th level spells are in play. With Wish, Miracle and True Ressurection, few things will stop an adequately rested party for long. By Design.

 

[Nightfall]

Bel,

Sounds to me just you have some whiny power gamers. My advice, smack them around a little with your own advantages.

 

[jasamcarl]

In fact, I know the rules quite well. It is my players who feel that high level play has no meaning. They have ranted about how easy it is to come back to life and how combat is not fun at high levels because no fear exists.

The fact that the would rather fight than do some of the RP that high level brings is probably a factor in their belief that high level is no fun, but I also believe that it comes, in part, from the rules.

Heroic play is fine, and a lot of fun. But, without fear, then a lot of the meaning of high level play is lost. The threat of losing the character just isn't there.

Your problem is that you're arguing for balanced combat. It's the video game mentality that combat is the entire purpose of the game. For you, it is "solid gamist design."

I am arguing for rules that support story components outside of combat. Fire and Forget Vancian magic supports combat and that has only gotten worse with 3.5.

In any event, I have not been arguing mechanics. In fact, I referenced a second edition effect of a spell and how I thought that it was a cool RP effect, and you have decided that "I do not know the rules." Advocating random penalties for RP reason will sure destroy that "solid gamist design."

However, please keep the insults coming. Since you know that I obviously do not know the rules.

I find this odd, because, properly played, high-level monsters have a very good chance of resulting in a tpk; it takes strenuous preperation to completly mitigate and maybe even a good use of divinations, which means the players probably deserve to win. The act of rping that should give the players a sense of narrative triumph. In addition, you can always use high ecl encounters, with the requisite higher xp awards, which encourages risk taking.

What you seem to find flavorful is arbitrary death, or that which can't be full put away by rules oriented player action. To which I would have to give a big bleh. That does not instill a sense of dramatic tension for me, but instead makes me think the dm doens't really know how to do his job. Your players seem to feel the same way. You are correct, random death = good gameplay. And a 'hard' game isn't neccesarily a good game nor representative of good game design. It's just a hack.

Again, this is a heroic game. The players aren't suppossed to judge their progress in terms of whether they survive, but whether they accomplish larger challenges and thus become more powerful through leveling. That is flavor for me and as a DM i'm confident in my ability to communicate these external stakes. You don't like this flavor, fine, but to deny that is flavor strikes me as a bit strained.

 

[Belen]

Bel,

Sounds to me just you have some whiny power gamers. My advice, smack them around a little with your own advantages.

I'll take the 5th amendment for 1000, Alex.

 

[Nightfall]

Don't worry I'll be happy to take them off your hands.

 

[Belen]

I find this odd, because, properly played, high-level monsters have a very good chance of resulting in a tpk; it takes strenuous preperation to completly mitigate and maybe even a good use of divinations, which means the players probably deserve to win. The act of rping that should give the players a sense of narrative triumph. In addition, you can always use high ecl encounters, with the requisite higher xp awards, which encourages risk taking.

What you seem to find flavorful is arbitrary death, or that which can't be full put away by rules oriented player action. To which I would have to give a big bleh. That does not instill a sense of dramatic tension for me, but instead makes me think the dm doens't really know how to do his job. Your players seem to feel the same way.

I try to be nice to people, but if you want to continue with personal attacks, then go for it. You have no idea what happens in my game and make assumptions based on my comments of ONE spell.

Try discussing the topic without laying down personal attacks, or are you so mindless that the only way you can argue is to make allusions to a group in which you have never played.

My entire argument pertains to having effects that cannot be overcome in 6 seconds. In fact, that it would be cool to have some things require an RP solution.

But please, keep proving yourself a prick!

 

[Belen]

Don't worry I'll be happy to take them off your hands.

You're in for a long drive.

They're ok. I just have to learn to watch them more carefully. They like finding combos that will "bend" the rules, which can be frustrating.

 

[Storminator]

You're in for a long drive.

They're ok. I just have to learn to watch them more carefully. They like finding combos that will "bend" the rules, which can be frustrating.

See if you can get them to give you a hand. I love to find interesting and spectacular combos, but I always tell my DM what I've found before I use it. Then he can anticipate its use, and the effect it'll have on the game without having to figure everything out under initiative pressure.

It's courteous powergaming.

PS