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

Raven Crowking said:
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.

I have fond memories of the very complicated and convoluted system of 2E running through my head. Many of them I ignored, but they were still there. Rolling initiative every round with initiative modifiers changing. Different ACs depending on weapon type vs. armor type. Different attack forms having completely different rules. THAC0. Spells that required more adjudication (good ol' expanding fireball).

3E really did streamline things as far as I'm concerned. Most things are done with d20+mods for a target number. Now, it did many more options to remember. If you don't know the rules then you're worse off in 3E, since in previous editions as the DM I could basically run everything without the Players having as much knowledge about the rules. But, I think the rules themselves are much more streamlined nowadays.

Raven Crowking said:
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?

Who was willing to part with them? Obviously a LOT of PCs would be willing to part with their magical items! At the very least, they would be looking to trade magical items if possible. So, if the PCs are willing to buy and sell and trade in magical items, why aren't the NPC adventurers?

Basically, its a breakdown in logic in a world where NPCs are loathe to ever get rid of magical items, but PCs are willing to sell items (and can even be rewarded for it with XP!). In this type of world, why aren't the NPC adventurers also looking to sell their magical items when they get back into town as well? Why are they all hoarding them?

Answer (IMO): Because the game was built with magical items as a DM controlled reward, much like XP. Not because it made any sort of sense in the actual game world.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

I agree. 3.x is pretty much lighter than it's former incarnations when it comes to combat (and most of the other stuff).

However, I really don't like it's inability to decide if the combat should be simple or complex. We got squares and aoos, in order to make things more tactical. On the other hand we don't have called shots (just an example, I don't like called shots) or more rules on tactical "attack-like" manouvers, only tactical movement.

In that matter, there are OGL options much more streamlined.
 

rounser said:
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. :confused:

B/c a world where magic exists but they haven't taken advantage of it to have say....a decanter of endless water helping to irrigate dry lands or continual light to keep teh streets safe at night, etc etc. just doesn't make SENSE! This is a matter of internal consistency. For me, a fantasy world where none of this stuff is done kills my sense of wonder...or encourages the wrong kind like "well why doesn't X Y or Z happen around here, we have easy disease curing after all". That knocks me out fo character, whereas I see a society steeped in magic, doing interesting (altho obviously you dislike real world tech translated into magical terms..I dig it) things with the magic that makes sense for a society where magic has been worked by people for centuries and millenia.

As far as quantifiable, what do you think spells are? If you say bibbity bobbity boo and wave your magic wand, you can turn a mouse into a horse. If you sprinkle some pixie dust, you will be able to fly. Quantifiable results based on effort. Sounds like science to me. Of course, any science that is far enough ahead of the technology level of a society will be viewed as magic.
 

I like my D&D to be D&Dish. Where else am I going to get that? It's been mentioned numerous times in various posts that it doesn't really reflect any of the other fantasy and that it has its own vision of fantasy, so yeah ... I mean no. It isn't too D&Dish.
 

ThirdWizard said:
I have fond memories of the very complicated and convoluted system of 2E running through my head. Many of them I ignored, but they were still there. Rolling initiative every round with initiative modifiers changing. Different ACs depending on weapon type vs. armor type. Different attack forms having completely different rules. THAC0. Spells that required more adjudication (good ol' expanding fireball).

You are conflating editions here, I think. Weapon vs. armor type was dropped in 2e, wasn't it? Needless to say, with the use of optional rules, you could make 2e a complicated beast. But the core was as simple as that of 3e, without the 5' steps, AoOs, different ACs depending upon who was attacking you with what and when that complicate matters. THAC0 was d20+mods compared against a target number.

In 3e, what is the standard combat round like?

Move, attack, adjust position? In order to move, check your route to ensure you provoke no AoOs? Try to place your opponent in a flanked position, certainly. In order to attack, determine what type of attack you are making so that you know whether or not you provoke an AoO, and to determine what AC your opponent has? Roll, apply damage, then take a 5-foot step in order to avoid being flanked yourself, or to put yourself in position for an AoO? Combat round done for you? No. You might have a swift action, a reaction (such as an AoO), or a free action yet to do.

By the time you've finished your turn, and we're on to the next player, three rounds have gone by in 1e.

For my money, something that is streamlined goes faster. 3e is elegant (unified mechanic) but not streamlined.


RC
 

SSquirrel said:
B/c a world where magic exists but they haven't taken advantage of it to have say....a decanter of endless water helping to irrigate dry lands or continual light to keep teh streets safe at night, etc etc. just doesn't make SENSE!

We could feed everyone on earth. We could house everyone. We could control our population and save our environment.

Please explain the difference.
 

Raven Crowking: I agree that combat went A LOT faster in 2e than in 3e. However this, IMO, is due to the fact that the combat options in 2e were so very limited comparatively.

That being said, I wouldn't put forth the argument that 3e combat is streamlined. The only comparison that would make it seem so would be to take the 2e rules and adapt the combat options from 3e to it and the result would be icky.

So I guess I agree with you. My thoughts are thus: 3e streamlined the combat as it was outlined in 2e ... and then added a bunch of wierd :):):):) your character could do that would slow it down again.

Thoughts?
 

Raven Crowking said:
You are conflating editions here, I think. Weapon vs. armor type was dropped in 2e, wasn't it?
It was present in 2e, but listed as an optional rule (that in my experience, was never, ever used).

Now, as for magic shops, it did seem awfully artificial that never under any circumstances would magic items be bought or sold. The 2nd Edition book DM's Option: High Level Campaigns was particularly condescending about it (in a book with otherwise good ideas), and even had a silly picture of a wizard shopping at a Wal-Mart like store for magic items with bargain bins of wands to show how magic shops are inherently ridiculous and against the core ideas of D&D.

I remember playing in a Planescape campaign where it really rang hollow. The DM took that advice to heart about never having NPCs sell magic items, in the highest magic D&D setting out there. Most monsters require magic weapons to hit, major parts of the campaign setting are devoted to cross-planar trading, and the campaign is built around a city where beings from across the multiverse come to conduct business, but nobody was willing to buy or sell magic items, because they are too precious to ever sell at any price.

However, why would a magic item shop automatically be like a late 20th or 21st century discount superstore? Even something cheap like a potion of Cure Light Wounds costs far more than the typical peasant can afford, much less the thousands of GP required for even a +1 weapon. Wal-Mart wouldn't look like Wal-Mart if even the most basic merchandise cost at least $500, and they stocked a few $500,000 items in the store that were small enough to walk away with. I always envisioned magic items shops as being one of several things, all of which being reasonable outgrowths of the culture and power level of a typical D&D world:

1. Kind of like a cross between a jewelry store and a gun store (stores selling expensive and dangerous items). Well protected glass cases protecting most items, display racks on the wall for the big things, very loyal guards keeping an eye on everything, probably numerous warding spells on the entire place to discourage theft and magical tampering. Every item Identified by the store and its magical potency and function vouched for in a statement sworn on serious legal penalty. A very heavy chest for all the money that changes hands, in a well fortified back room. The entire place in one of the best neighborhoods in town, with plenty of city guards around.

2. An auction house. A highly respected merchant company takes magic items to sell on consignment, and has a periodic auction. The items are identified and legally vouched for in identity and kept under the tightest security. The auction would attract interesting and wealthy people from all around: adventurers of all types, wealthy nobles, military leaders, powerful wizards and clerics, maybe a few intelligent monsters (depending on the local laws allowing them into town). Very hefty security discourages anybody from getting violent though.

3. A brokerage. They don't deal directly with the magic items, but they have ways of contacting many wizards and clerics (and other adventurers) who are interested in magic item creation or trading, and what they are looking for, have, or capiable of making. You go to the brokerage, pay a fee to become a client, then pay another fee to make a search of the records for suchandsuch item. They look for the nearest person who has such an item they are willing to sell or make, and contact them for you. If they are still willing to provide the item, they put you in touch directly with them to conduct the trade.
 

Goblyn said:
So I guess I agree with you. My thoughts are thus: 3e streamlined the combat as it was outlined in 2e ... and then added a bunch of wierd :):):):) your character could do that would slow it down again.

Thoughts?

Pretty much. Of course that odd stuff is fun, so the question is, how do you include the fun stuff and make combat move again? I haven't come up with a great answer to this one yet.

RC
 

Raven Crowking said:
Pretty much. Of course that odd stuff is fun, so the question is, how do you include the fun stuff and make combat move again? I haven't come up with a great answer to this one yet.

RC

I've been kind of wrestling with this one, too, because I love the options but would really like the combat to flow well.

If I come up with something, I'll let you know. Right now I'm thinking 'quick reference sheet'.
Possibly that's just a band aid but great if it works.
 

Remove ads

Top