Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 4572114" data-attributes="member: 22424">1) Those books were entirely optional. Not using them still allowed for that rules-light narrative-style play. In fact, I was running a campaign exactly like that when 3e was released.2) In the same way that &quot;Tome of Battles&quot; and &quot;Star Wars Saga Edition&quot; served as test-beds for many of the ideas later incorporated into 4e, so too did the &quot;Player's Options&quot; books test several concepts that later appeared in 3e - with Attacks of Opportunity being one of the most notable examples.The 3e core rules are far more dense than the 2nd Edition equivalents, and despite claims of modularity were in fact far more tightly integrated. Additionally, the page count of the 3e books is significantly higher than their 2nd Edition equivalents (except perhaps the Monster Manual, which was probably shorter than the 2nd Edition Monstrous Manual, and yet contained far more monsters). Furthermore, the 3e DMG actually contains a large amount of useful information, unlike its 2nd Edition equivalent, which was almost worthless apart from the section on magic items.I vastly prefer 3e to 2nd Edition. It (actually 3.5e) remains my edition of choice, and on reading it it was immediately apparent to me that this was the way the game should always have been. But I'm not blind to its flaws, and rules light it most certainly was not.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="delericho, post: 4572114, member: 22424"] 1) Those books were entirely optional. Not using them still allowed for that rules-light narrative-style play. In fact, I was running a campaign exactly like that when 3e was released. 2) In the same way that "Tome of Battles" and "Star Wars Saga Edition" served as test-beds for many of the ideas later incorporated into 4e, so too did the "Player's Options" books test several concepts that later appeared in 3e - with Attacks of Opportunity being one of the most notable examples. The 3e core rules are far more dense than the 2nd Edition equivalents, and despite claims of modularity were in fact far more tightly integrated. Additionally, the page count of the 3e books is significantly higher than their 2nd Edition equivalents (except perhaps the Monster Manual, which was probably shorter than the 2nd Edition Monstrous Manual, and yet contained far more monsters). Furthermore, the 3e DMG actually contains a large amount of useful information, unlike its 2nd Edition equivalent, which was almost worthless apart from the section on magic items. I vastly prefer 3e to 2nd Edition. It (actually 3.5e) remains my edition of choice, and on reading it it was immediately apparent to me that this was the way the game should always have been. But I'm not blind to its flaws, and rules light it most certainly was not. [/QUOTE]

Verification