Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrankTrollman" data-source="post: 1130869" data-attributes="member: 14225">Actually, in ages past you could hurt monsters with +X or better weapon to hit if you had enough hit dice. So a powerful Fighter could penetrate &quot;DR&quot; or &quot;incorporeality&quot; with a teddy bear on a stick.It was in many ways less realistic, but it meant that a Fighter could roll out of bed naked and have a chance to defeat a Spectre. And thus, MDJ really didn't matter.---Another difference, of course, was that there were no item creation rules that made any sense. In 3e and 3.5, when you gain magic items you can't use, you don't put them in glass case in the bat cave - you melt them down for power. In AD&amp;D, there was nothing you could do with &quot;another +2 sword&quot;. Thus, you actually had a big pile of +2 swords, and you left stockpiles of them around your house. Getting hit by a MDJ just made you go home and pick up your third best sword.In 3rd edition, if you get enough +2 swords (five, in fact) you can melt them into a +3 sword, and so on. Thus, not only are those &quot;lesser&quot; magic items a lot more useful for you - the game expects you to have a lot less of them.---In total, in AD&amp;D you were expected to have back-up magic weapons at home and even if you didn't you could still punch out a pit fiend if you were high enough level for Disjunction to be an issue. In 3e, those genre tropes of giant piles of gold and stacks of magic items have been removed in order to make a wealth-dependent magic item creation system (questionably) workable.And it has changed MDJ from just a cool story spell to a campaign ending catastrophe.-Frank</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrankTrollman, post: 1130869, member: 14225"] Actually, in ages past you could hurt monsters with +X or better weapon to hit if you had enough [i]hit dice[/i]. So a powerful Fighter could penetrate "DR" or "incorporeality" with a teddy bear on a stick. It was in many ways less realistic, but it meant that a Fighter could roll out of bed naked and have a chance to defeat a Spectre. And thus, MDJ really didn't matter. --- Another difference, of course, was that there were no item creation rules that made any sense. In 3e and 3.5, when you gain magic items you can't use, you don't put them in glass case in the bat cave - you melt them down for power. In AD&D, there was [i]nothing you could do[/i] with "another +2 sword". Thus, you actually had a big pile of +2 swords, and you left stockpiles of them around your house. Getting hit by a MDJ just made you go home and pick up your third best sword. In 3rd edition, if you get enough +2 swords (five, in fact) you can melt them into a +3 sword, and so on. Thus, not only are those "lesser" magic items a lot more useful for you - the game expects you to have a lot less of them. --- In total, in AD&D you were expected to have back-up magic weapons at home and even if you didn't you could still punch out a pit fiend if you were high enough level for Disjunction to be an issue. In 3e, those genre tropes of giant piles of gold and stacks of magic items have been removed in order to make a wealth-dependent magic item creation system (questionably) workable. And it has changed MDJ from just a cool story spell to a campaign ending catastrophe. -Frank [/QUOTE]

Verification