Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mkletch" data-source="post: 481472" data-attributes="member: 3396">I tend to have a 'tell it like I see it' and, occasionally, sarcastic personality.  And the only things that I can see, in common with you, are the rules as written in the books.  It really is that simple, at least for me.  I've read the material, and kind of expect others to do the same.  To me, the rules are obvious.  The only 'flaws' are gaps or contradictions in those rules.I'm sure my posts on the general RPG discussion have a much different tone than in this rules forum.[My addition]I had expected a complete overhaul of D&D when I got into 3E.  I have been playing D&D, fairly continuously, for over 21 years.  I was there as TSR got strange in the 1E days, and there when 2E was released, and disappointed by the superficiality of some of the the changes that made 2E, and hearbroken as 2E became a morass of supplements and books with no core ethos or goal.  When I got 3E, I wanted the core values an mechanics, the essence of D&D, really, rebuilt from scratch into a solid, consistent system.  The fact that there is so much traffic on this rules forum is a testament to my disappointment.  I still love the game, and play 1-3 times per week with different groups.  But the learning curve is there, for gamers joining our group, or when I go to play with another group.  Why is there a learning curve, other than directions of where we are playing and people's names?  A game system that is supposed to be a standard medium for entertainment interaction should not have a steep learning curve every time you sit down with a new group of players.  That might just be life, but life is not a "system" either.I have seen people point out where there were copy and paste errors in the first printings of the PHB, for example, where the text was taken directly from 2.5E (the black book printings and the players/DM options books).  There was some playtesting, but the groups playing were familiar and comfortable with 2E.  They did not mind, at the time, the contagion of 2E into 3E.  Nor did they really have enough time to discover all of the problems before release.  Like any software product, the beta test does not necessarily catch all of the problems.  Remember how bad the Battle.net realms were when Diablo II first was released.  They had no idea what would happen, or what problems would surface, when the user base increased 500-fold.3E playtesting is the same thing.  So we have a magic item system that is ignored (ring of invisibility or speed weapon ability) or used but hated/errata'd (the speed armor ability from DotF).  We have spells that are constantly bickered about (Harm) or ignored (most Summon Monster spells), and a system where the designers specifically admit that "not all spells of the same level are equal" (how is it a system then?).  Rule-0 is too big a part of 3E.  I add a dash of salt, not a truck-load, to season food.So, take this as a combined apology, explanation and manifesto, if you will.  It's just how I see things.-Fletch!</blockquote>

Verification