Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7749047" data-attributes="member: 996">It wasn't just that the sheer volume of material made tweaking any one thing a fraught exercise, both in terms of blowing up the game with an unforeseen broken combo, and in terms of blowing up a player's precious 'build,' but that the 3.x community had a RAW uber alles zeitgeist going that was utterly intolerant of variants or house rules, of any kind - it would just tolerate the banhammer, a sub-set of 3.5 - core-only or E6 - was acceptable, if looked down upon.Similarly, 4e had a lot of material out so a lot of wires to choose from when deciding which one to cut without blowing it up, and while it was less prone to broken combos, it was pretty neatly balanced as it was so it can't have seemed like there was a lot to be gained in tinkering.&nbsp; Plus, re-designing a game is essentially what we're talking about, and 4e was a game (well, a D&amp;D) designed to a comparatively high standard, it was intimidating to attempt amateur design work at that same level.&nbsp; Oh, and 3e &amp; 4e were both open to re-skinning, so if you did have a player who really wanted some off-the-wall bit of gear in 3e or off-the-wall power concept in 4e, he could probably just take something off the shelf and describe it differently, when, back in the day, you'd've likely had to've created a new rule for whatever it was.&nbsp;That's d20, not 3e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7749047, member: 996"] It wasn't just that the sheer volume of material made tweaking any one thing a fraught exercise, both in terms of blowing up the game with an unforeseen broken combo, and in terms of blowing up a player's precious 'build,' but that the 3.x community had a RAW uber alles zeitgeist going that was utterly intolerant of variants or house rules, of any kind - it would just tolerate the banhammer, a sub-set of 3.5 - core-only or E6 - was acceptable, if looked down upon. Similarly, 4e had a lot of material out so a lot of wires to choose from when deciding which one to cut without blowing it up, and while it was less prone to broken combos, it was pretty neatly balanced as it was so it can't have seemed like there was a lot to be gained in tinkering. Plus, re-designing a game is essentially what we're talking about, and 4e was a game (well, a D&D) designed to a comparatively high standard, it was intimidating to attempt amateur design work at that same level. Oh, and 3e & 4e were both open to re-skinning, so if you did have a player who really wanted some off-the-wall bit of gear in 3e or off-the-wall power concept in 4e, he could probably just take something off the shelf and describe it differently, when, back in the day, you'd've likely had to've created a new rule for whatever it was. That's d20, not 3e. [/QUOTE]

Verification