Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenjib" data-source="post: 32900" data-attributes="member: 530">Movement rules in 3e are likewise effected in every way that you say 1e are, and moreso, since the whole action system is effected, which is more integral to the system than 1e's movement system since it not only determines how much you move, but also what other types of actions you can perform depending on how you move as well as your movement rate.  It also effects numerous feats and skills.How are overbearing, grappling, and pummelling, effected by removing miniatures in any way that they are not in 3e?  In addition with 3e you have problems with AoO related to these actions and feats that rely on this relationship.  If getting rid of AoO is the fix for this then you are tampering with the balance of the entire feat system and the balance between fighter and non-fighter classes in a way that does not happen in 1e.1e might give a massive headache, but 3e gives a titanic headache!All of those area and position issues apply equally to 3e (whether or not a thief can backstab is just a subset of whether or not he is in position to attack).  I actually left them out intentionally because they applied to both.  You're right that I should have included them for the sake of completeness but it doesn't really tip the balance toward 3e or change my argument.You're right in that my argument wasn't structured all that well.  Let me try again by giving you an example of how things reverberate through the system:You wrote:> AoO's has little impact on fleeing and pursuit, it just puts you back where the 1e/2e rules were.But what things unique to 3e do you have to consider to get there just regarding the relationship between AoO's and fleeing/pursuit?1.  Tumble2.  Mobility3.  Combat Reflexes4.  Reach weapons vs. non reach weapons5.  Hustle vs. Run (only in a straight line)6.  Loss of dex bonus while running7.  Charge8.  Partial charge and hasteA few of these are very easy fixes.  In additiona, some of them are only very slightly affected by such a rules modification.  Nonetheless they still come to consideration.  Also keep in mind that fleeing/pursuit is only one small subset of the issues that crop up with removing AoO.So, what's easier to do, change all of this or just have it that simple in the first place?  Your argument here seems to support my point.  You state that if you change X, Y, and Z, in 3e then you get rules in this area that are as simple as 1e.  My point is that you have to change X, Y, and Z, in 3e in order to get rules in this area that are as simple as 1e.  It's two different ways to say the same thing.  3e requires more work either way you say it.The same thing applies to your disallowing grapple, pummle, overbear, etc.  Look at all of the things that you are suggesting we change to make this fix just to get back to where we were in 1e.I'm not saying that the system irrevocably breaks when you try to make changes like this, but rather that in order to make such changes you need to revisit a much larger number of rules and special cases.  3e is a somewhat tight and interdependent system.I responded to this issue in my reply to the second quoted reference above.I don't think that this is a fair argument.  What if I only wanted to remove one of these rules and not the other?  The rules in 3e are more interdependent.  It seems like this supports my example as well.  If you remove miniatures, it's easier to just remove AoO as well.  The rules are intertwined in such a way that it's hard to extricate them from each other.Good point about concealment and cover.  You are definitely right.I don't think that most of my arguments also apply with equal force to 1e and would be interested in seeing you back this claim up further.  Here are the specific examples from my original post and *new comments on them*:1.  Requires a complete re-working of flanking rules*3e only*2.  requires a complete re-working of the action system (which is very foundation of a very large percentage of the game mechanics)*As I said before, the action system in 3e effects not only movement now, but what types of actions (standard, full, partial, move-equivalent, free) you can perform and when.  These actions also effect how fast you move since you can only move at certain rates depending on what type of action you have (hustle, charge, partial charge, run).  Changing 3e is much more complicated in this regard.*3.  impacts all situations involving threatened areas and those that rely on these rules*3e only*4.  impacts concealment and cover rules*You got me here.  This shouldn't have been given as an example.*5.  impacts attacks of opportunity*3e only*6.  makes several feats very difficult to work with (e.g. Spring Attack, mobility). *3e only*As far as I can tell only one of these examples applies with equal force to 1e.You're right in that I left out some things that are effected in 1e, and made it seem like the conversion was easier than it is, but so far all of those items equally apply to 3e in addition to the extra problems that come up with 3e.  I still hold that it is far more difficult to simplify the 3e rules.You also didn't address my concern over impacting numerous feats and also my concern over having to fret over numerous rules supplements which are tightly interwoven with the 3e rules assumptions.  Part of the 3e identity is the whole d20 thing and the rules expandibility.  I think that it's only fair to consider the fact that 3e is an open system and 1e was a closed system.  These traits also have their advantages and disadvantages.  The need to worry about forward compatibility is definitely a significant issue in 3e that did not exist as much nearly as it did in 1e, since new content was more uniform, coming from one publisher as it did.Good debate Storm Raven!  Your arguments are very insightful.  Hopefully I did not misunderstand any of your points as I addressed them.  If I did please let me know.Hi Henry,I agree with you that 3e combat can be very cinematic.  In fact, one of my favorite things about 3e is the amazing job they did to make fighters suddenly so exciting and dynamic.  I think that fighters, by far, got the most dramatic overhaul of all of the classes.  In fact, I think that the most significant changes to the fundamental system benefit them most, although it's a tough call between them and rogues.  I think that in 3e the cinematic stuff gets incorporated into the rules more whereas in 1e you just wing it more often and the cinematics have less actual bearing on the outcome of the battle.  In that way I think that 3e is more cinematic.  It just loses simplicity, speed, and ease of play, as a tradeoff.  I think that it's definity worth the trade off though, and I really like all of the combat options in 3e, despite my arguments above.final note:  I'm going to repeat my ubiquitous disclaimer here - I do like 3e better!</blockquote>

Verification