Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="an_idol_mind" data-source="post: 3356928" data-attributes="member: 43749">I went through two phases with 2nd edition.First, I went through a phase where I bought every new thing that hit the market - or tried to, at least. This was a combination of me getting my first job (thus having real spending money for a change) and me just starting down the role-playing path.After the Player's Option series, I was routinely going to games with over a dozen books, just for one character. I got overloaded on the optional rules, and ultimately shaved things down to just the three core books. The problem there was that the core rules for AD&D had gaping holes in it that made the game obnoxious to play without supplements.In 3rd edition, I generally stick to core rules only. It's not that I hate the wealth of material out there, just that I want to keep things simple. That said, I think there are two main differences between the current rules and older editions.First, the supplements generally contain some consistency. While there are exceptions, most of the books seem well-balanced against each other, and only a few bring about entirely new systems of running the game.Second, the gaping holes that existed in any version of AD&D have been patched in the 3rd edition. There aren't massive areas of the rules that shout out for an overhaul or require me to spend significant time houseruling things. The rules still aren't perfect, but they're very solid now. That makes running a core only game easy, since I don't have to buy supplements to fix broken rules. It also makes adding material from other books, should I choose to do so, much easier, since it's adding options to the game rather than rewriting the rules just to allow options.</blockquote>

Verification