WSmith
First Post
EricNoah said:Here's a DM's perspective: In the intro to the 1E DMG Gary Gygax talks about DMing being part art, part science. I think with 3E there is a somewhat larger emphasis on the "science" part of DMing and playing. If you want to create new monsters or magic items or spells or abilities (feats, skills), there are some fairly complex rules to get under your belt. I can see where a 1E or 2E DM might balk at 3E's attempts to get you to "do it right."
I personally like having some guidelines in areas where there weren't any before, but also feel a little bit of a straightjacket in one sense --
As do I. I love 3e, but when I tried to make magic items and read the rules, Oui! I think it is good and/or bad, depending on your personality type. I came from the "art" DM school as opposed to the "science" school. So, the complexity does make me feel straightjacketed. But while some rules are complex in some ways, more are so simple, at least in my mind, that I can't imagine playing without them: opposed rolls to such things as spot/hide, cyclic initiative, three saves, rolling high is always good, AC always going upwards, just to name a few.
AoO: I agree playing dispells many misconceptions about AoO. However, the way it was written in the PHB adds to the confussion. If you are in Borders or your FLGS, at least read if not buy the WOT RPG book. Reading its entry on AoO makes so much more sense than the 3e PHB.