Has D&D become too...D&Dish?

[Raven Crowking]

Well, no, because, by RAW, after the third round you get the "strength and location" of each item. Pretty simple to move the pile around and triangulate.

BTW, again, that's a sign of your generosity.

If there are several thousand objects in your pile (everything, right?) moving stuff around and triangulating assumes that you can remember the initial positions of those items.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Then streamline the combat system. A lot.

It's far more streamlined in 3E than in previous editions.

And make the NPCs easier to stat up.

On this front, 3E could benefit greatly from something like IH's villain classes. Or at least quick build methods for NPCs. It's something I keep meaning to do myself for my own use, but I never get around to doing it even though it would save me time in the long run. I admit that most major NPCs (anyone within ~3 CR of the PCs' ECL) have a prestige class and at least half of those are probably full spellcasters.

 

[Raven Crowking]

It's far more streamlined in 3E than in previous editions.

Combat? 3e assumes that players have to make decisions on a round-by-round basis that, previously, their characters would have been assumed to have made. The introduction of feats means that each and every combat can, and probably does, have special conditions that have to be taken into account. Although the math in THAC0 (which first popped up in 1e) was counter-intuitive, it wasn't really any more difficult than figuring out what modifiers to AC apply to the attack you are making in 3e.

If you say that the 3e combat system is better than that of previous editions, I won't argue. If you say it is more streamlined, I disagree vehemently.

On this front, 3E could benefit greatly from something like IH's villain classes. Or at least quick build methods for NPCs. It's something I keep meaning to do myself for my own use, but I never get around to doing it even though it would save me time in the long run. I admit that most major NPCs (anyone within ~3 CR of the PCs' ECL) have a prestige class and at least half of those are probably full spellcasters.

I certainly agree that quick build methods for NPCs would be a great boon to the game.

RC

 

[rounser]

Settings like Ptolus and Eberron are actually making great use of an old Dragon article that was one of the greatest Sense of Wonder pieces I'd ever read in direct relation to D&D. It was an article devoted to what happens when you have a magic using society and the changes in society. I believei t had several of the talked about things like invisible guardsmen, bans on detection, continual light streetlights, teleportation circles for shipping, etc. I'm sure someone with an old Dragon archive disc set can find it.

Things like that were what always really interested me and I wondered why they didn't do that in the game. Now they do.

IMO this is a terrible, terrible idea, and explains some of why I'm allergic to the premises of these settings.

Exploring the logical consequences of magic on society is like exploring the consequences of physics on a dragon; the fantasy comes crashing to the ground, and the magic loses it's magic. Geeks love to analyse systems, but exploring the "logical consequences" of fantasy is like overanalysing romance; by analysing it and tying up it's loose threads, you kill it stone dead.

It boggles my mind that you think pinning down fantasy as a quantifiable cause-and-effect thing (i.e. a science) is going to improve sensawunda, instead of inevitably grinding it to dust.

 

[Glyfair]

Exploring the logical consequences of magic on society is like exploring the consequences of physics on a dragon; the fantasy comes crashing to the ground, and the magic loses it's magic. Geeks love to analyse systems, but exploring the "logical consequences" of fantasy is like overanalysing romance; by analysing it and tying up it's loose threads, you kill it stone dead.

It all comes down to a matter of which logical bits hurt your willing suspension of disbelief. I don't feel Eberron goes to deeply into it.

Take a 1E premise that was common. Players can't go around buying magic items, they are too rare and valuable. Players can sell magic items, but only get so much because "they aren't worth it." That broke a lot of people's ability to believe a setting. Thus most campaigns I played in had some sort of a magic store (the exact method varied from campaign to campaign).

 

[rounser]

It all comes down to a matter of which logical bits hurt your willing suspension of disbelief. I don't feel Eberron goes to deeply into it.

Going some way down that path also seems to ensure a fair bit of "love it or hate it" type material. Usually this sort of thing crops up in experimental homebrews. But then, one person's lame is another's cool.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Take a 1E premise that was common. Players can't go around buying magic items, they are too rare and valuable. Players can sell magic items, but only get so much because "they aren't worth it." That broke a lot of people's ability to believe a setting. Thus most campaigns I played in had some sort of a magic store (the exact method varied from campaign to campaign).

I always thought that the limitation on selling magic items was based upon finding someone who can afford them. PCs in 1e were exceptionally wealthy individuals, even on character creation (it states this explicitly in the PHB) for the area they are in.

 

[The Shaman]

But, like the other thread, I'm just tired of people looking at both versions of the game through some very nostalgia colored glasses.

(Edited by The Shaman.)

Both fans of earlier editions and the current edition make the same mistakes at times, Hussar. It's too easy to dismiss preferences for older games as "nostalgia" - it's a sweeping and inaccurate generalization that's no more true than saying, "All 3e players are munchkins and powergamers." An edition choice can be an informed preference, and dismissing it with pejoratives like "nostalgia" serves nothing and no one.

With that in mind, as the wise man says, "There are two kinds of fools in the world. The first says, 'This is old, therefore it is good.' The second says, 'This is new, therefore it is better.'"

Personally I have no desire to play any edition of D&D anymore - there are other game systems I like better, some new, some old, all on their own merits. I admit it does get my back up a bit when gamers criticize a system or an edition they obviously don't know very well, but that's just 'cause I'm cantankerous like that.

Now get off my lawn you kids before I turn th' hose on ya!

 

[Glyfair]

I always thought that the limitation on selling magic items was based upon finding someone who can afford them. PCs in 1e were exceptionally wealthy individuals, even on character creation (it states this explicitly in the PHB) for the area they are in.

Perhaps, who could afford the magic items then? Adventurers, it seems like (since they are exceptionally wealthy individuals). However, Gary, among others, have did go on the record and say PCs shouldn't be able to buy magic items.

The reasons were pure metagaming (keep the players poor so they want to adventure) that fell apart when looked at too closely.

Indeed, the whole D&D economic system wasn't feasable. It bore up well when the adventures focused on the dungeon. Once adventuring moved away from the dungeon into the "real world", people started seeing flaws in it. It's still not particularly accurate, but it does have a different model now.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Perhaps, who could afford the magic items then? Adventurers, it seems like (since they are exceptionally wealthy individuals). However, Gary, among others, have did go on the record and say PCs shouldn't be able to buy magic items.

Again, because who would they buy them from? When magic items are rare and precious, who willingly parts with them? You might be able to buy the odd item here and there, but wholesale magic shops?

A conceit of 1e was that the current gameworld was in a "dark age" and the PCs were uncovering the wonders of a previous era. The secrets to making many of these items had been lost, or required vast research. Hence the dungeon, which was often the ruins from that previous civilization. Mighty magics existed before the Rain of Colorless Fire, or in ancient Myth Drannor. Their like is not to be found among mortals in this age, save those who have delved into the dangerous ruins of the past and won their secrets.

Indeed, the whole D&D economic system wasn't feasable. It bore up well when the adventures focused on the dungeon. Once adventuring moved away from the dungeon into the "real world", people started seeing flaws in it. It's still not particularly accurate, but it does have a different model now.

Again, the prices in the PHB were stated to be specifically based upon a "gold rush" mentality fostered by the sudden influx of wealth adventuring caused. If you followed the RAW, you would presumably take this into account, and prices would drop as the PCs travelled farther and farther from the wild adventuring regions.