Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RFisher" data-source="post: 3426238" data-attributes="member: 3608">Do you know what I did when I wanted a game with things other games had? Can you guess?I played those other games. (O_O)I know, call me crazy! How silly of me. Obviously I should have dropped half the rules of D&D & imported half the rules of those other games instead. How foolish I was in my youth! How glad I am that 3e came along & showed me the light! Why would I play those games that had been designed from the ground up with those features? Sheer foolishness!(^_^) (...in case you don't notice the smiley in my sig, here's a couple more...) (^_^)Yeah. I've played both too. My 1e fighters were just as interesting as my 3e fighters have been. For me. Because there are a lot more things I find interesting than mechanical differences.In fact, I get kind of annoyed that 3e doesn't just give me the four or five worthwhile variations on the fighter class instead of making me discover them through the feat prereqs.If 3e fighters were identical to 1e fighters, you'd still have the option of all those other games that have long had the kinds of mechanical differences you find interesting.I'm the first one to agree that previous editions didn't do a very good job of communicating how to play the game. Yes, yes, yes. It took me decades to figure out how those games were intended to be played. That's bad. That's a huge failing of those games.(Although, one may argue that there simply wasn't an intended way to play. Personally, I think that's nearly as bad, but that's a discussion for another time.)That doesn't automatically mean, however, that the game itself--the style of play it was intended for--is worthless. That there are DMs that misinterpret the game doesn't impact my enjoyment of the game.Even with how clearly it's explained, look at all the complaints about how many DMs misunderstand Take 10. How many of us who understand AoOs think they were as clearly explained as they could be?A new edition could have focused more on better communicating the game rather than changing so many things. I'm not necessarily saying that they should have. (Please remember, I do like 3e.) I'm just saying that "how to handle hiding was poorly--or not--explained" doesn't automatically mean "we need a new/different hiding mechanic".Heh! From the beginning I thought NWPs were a sad kludge. At the time, I did want a skill system, but NWP wasn't it. Yet, I do see the lack of a skill system as a feature of classic D&D & AD&D these days. As many others seem to as well.</blockquote>

Verification