Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 2388235" data-attributes="member: 7635">I think alot of people are forgetting what D&D 3.0 was trying to fix. Over the years, AD&D varied wildly based on HR, supplements, and DM perrogative. I might use just standard AD&D pummeling, but Bob uses the OA martial arts and Luke uses Combat and Tactics Unarmed Strikes, etc. There WAS no guideline to where a ghoul was an appropriate challenge for a 1st level PC, or that a giant was appropriate for a 10th. Or that +5 swords are for 16th level PCs. Or the cleric's power varied from nil (complete priests) to vastly (faiths and avatars). Or that the RPGA had a houserule and ban list miles long. Or that by design flaw thieves were weak and wizards ruled all at high levels. Or that elves WERE the best racial choice. D&D 3.0 tried to put everything on a level playing field that a rule had existed for for 20 YEARS! They tied as much as they could to a common mechanic. They retooled everything and provided an option to handle (nearly) everything. Why? Cuz thats what players (most of em) WANTED from D&D, a unified system. The downside was having hundreds of rules to cover obscure scenarios (overrun anyone?) They also made everything balanced, to the joy of some and the chargin of others. By taking into account Conan's +1 sword into the CR, they made his sword necessary. by assuming a traditional mixed party, the made it almost necessary. D&D rules "bloat" was in response to what players wanted in the late 90's, more unified structure and easy resolution. With that came the bloat of having hundreds of rules to stop powergaming, adjuncate wealth, and balance weapon damage. Not every DM wants (or needs) this kind of hand-holding, but there are some that DO. A good DM can make a game work with a detailed combat system or with paper-rock-scissors. A poor DM could use every shred of help they can find.  When we were younger, we had 16 people beat up on a giant. 16! In MELEE! A battlemat would have made that impossible. Was my DM a bad DM? No, just young and inexperienced. Would the battlemat shown him that was impossible! Probably! A battlemat would have solved a lot of fireball disputes (I wasn't within 20 feet! Yes you were!) We can get through a combat in quickly even counting squares, making 5' steps and using tactical manuvers (grappls still slow down the game though). As many have said, the biggest fault I have with Rules Lite is the "mother may I" syndrome. Mother, may I move and attack? (nah, he's too far). What about me (yeah, your closer, go ahead). Can I swing from the chandeleer? What about knock him off the balcony? Catch the falling phial? Without a rule to fall back on, the DM decides on the spot. As both a player and a DM, I'd rather have a cushy rule-set that I can tweak than having to adjuncate rules on the fly. YMMV.</blockquote>

Verification