I Don't Get it?
- Thread starter Gallo22
- Start date
Limper
First Post
The reason the rules drive some of us nuts is simple... not all groups handle things like yours. In our group the players are lucky if we get any say at all. We like the story but the DM is hell bent on changing to 3.5 even if it invalidates 80% of the encounters and event that have already happened. The group is lvl 17 and the 3.5 changes are going to be devestating to some of the players... like anyone who casts spells.
We've been playing together since the mid 80's and finding a new group is a horrifying thought for the bulk of us... but I for one will have to do so.
The rules and the story matter in equal porportions to me... I was only luke warm on 3.0 and i haven't seen a single aspect of 3.5 I liked. If I want to house rule stuff I have to start a new group... hell it might just be easier to quit the dumb hobby altogether but I don't really know anything else to do with my time... I started playing in 1979.
These are the reasons that I get upset in my accustomed group there are no changes any more... not since 3.0 came out. By the book rules and I hate the new books rules... I get irate at others supporting a point that I'' likely have thrown in my face at a later date by my DM or fellow players about how I am wrong for not liking the changes.
We've been playing together since the mid 80's and finding a new group is a horrifying thought for the bulk of us... but I for one will have to do so.
The rules and the story matter in equal porportions to me... I was only luke warm on 3.0 and i haven't seen a single aspect of 3.5 I liked. If I want to house rule stuff I have to start a new group... hell it might just be easier to quit the dumb hobby altogether but I don't really know anything else to do with my time... I started playing in 1979.
These are the reasons that I get upset in my accustomed group there are no changes any more... not since 3.0 came out. By the book rules and I hate the new books rules... I get irate at others supporting a point that I'' likely have thrown in my face at a later date by my DM or fellow players about how I am wrong for not liking the changes.
Limper said:
Good comments Limper. I guess I'm just lucky to have a good group that's open to change and suggestions. I don't want you to think my group is perfect, we have our fights like any good "marriage". I did not stop to think about your situation. Sorry to hear it, but it makes sense to complain alittle if your in one like this.
Edit: for the most part the group I'm in is sticking with the current edition ans will slowly incorporate chnages as we see fit. We don't plan of jumping off the deep end until we check the waters...
Gallo22
Last edited:
Tom Cashel
First Post
Re: Re: Re: I Don't Get it?
"There are trivial truths & there are great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true."
-Neils Bohr
Gallo22 said:
"There are trivial truths & there are great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true."
-Neils Bohr
Tom Cashel
First Post
Now you've got it!
sithramir
First Post
ok
I just think the reason people argue is that its not a matter of "we can change this to how we like it". Its more a matter of "I'm lazy and want to make a character with the rules and have him balanced with other players. If I want to make a wizard but he's useless the whole time I don't enjoy it. Sure we can change thing to make it better. But we shouldn't HAVE to do that. Changes like that should only be for more flavor or because the group likes it better. NOT because if they don't something isn't right. I think thats the idea.
As for a lot of the arguements. People COMPARE the new changes to the older ones when really you can't do that. 3.5 is balanced for all the things in 3.5 (or hopefully is). If its made some things weaker in certain ways like spells lasting less it might have balanced it or other additions that you might not realize have. So people assume they're characters are being dumped on by changes that they refuse to take into the WHOLE aspect or might be unable to.
I just think the reason people argue is that its not a matter of "we can change this to how we like it". Its more a matter of "I'm lazy and want to make a character with the rules and have him balanced with other players. If I want to make a wizard but he's useless the whole time I don't enjoy it. Sure we can change thing to make it better. But we shouldn't HAVE to do that. Changes like that should only be for more flavor or because the group likes it better. NOT because if they don't something isn't right. I think thats the idea.
As for a lot of the arguements. People COMPARE the new changes to the older ones when really you can't do that. 3.5 is balanced for all the things in 3.5 (or hopefully is). If its made some things weaker in certain ways like spells lasting less it might have balanced it or other additions that you might not realize have. So people assume they're characters are being dumped on by changes that they refuse to take into the WHOLE aspect or might be unable to.
MarauderX
Explorer
Perspective.
In groups I am in and have been in the past there is usually some debate about what rules are good or not. If I don't agree with certain things the DM has a rule for, I explain my view and hopefully get a ruling towards our favor. If I get nothing I live with it, but at times I think there is no reason for certain things, that a rule was made arbitrarily and although the rest of the players may agree, the DM still holds fast to his ruling. That's when I turn to these very boards to gain a bit of perspective on some rules and usually can see full explanations that our DM didn't give, or hasn't even thought of, but a logical train of thought from a fellow gamer that has had just as much or more experience in keeping gameplay in balance.
In groups I am in and have been in the past there is usually some debate about what rules are good or not. If I don't agree with certain things the DM has a rule for, I explain my view and hopefully get a ruling towards our favor. If I get nothing I live with it, but at times I think there is no reason for certain things, that a rule was made arbitrarily and although the rest of the players may agree, the DM still holds fast to his ruling. That's when I turn to these very boards to gain a bit of perspective on some rules and usually can see full explanations that our DM didn't give, or hasn't even thought of, but a logical train of thought from a fellow gamer that has had just as much or more experience in keeping gameplay in balance.
Similar Threads
