Is 3e a different game than 1e/2e?

[Drawmack]

I voted that it is not the same system. The mechanics are too divergent for it to be considered the same game as 2e.

As far as feel goes, with the right setting I can play a GURPS game with the same feel as D&D. Most feel is the GM and players not the system.

As far as conversion goes I have converted characters and/or worlds between 2e --> GURPS, GURPS --> 3e, FUDGE --> 3e, 3e --> FUDGE. So the argument of conversion just doesn't hold water for me. Matter of fact it was easier to convert between 2e and GURPS then it was between 2e and 3e.

The differences in the systems are vast but here are a couple.

Lowlight vision for Infervision --> If this doesn't give a game a different feel then nothing will.

Everything is not roll add your mod and see if that beats DC, AC, etc. No more roll above this and under that.

No more THACO (and I think everyone who has ever attempted to explain THACO to a newbie is greatful for that one)

Skills are way more flexible then NWP could have ever hoped to be.

Feats are way more flexible then WP could have ever hoped to be.

Every class uses the same level chart and it's got an easy formula. (Class Level * 1000 + EXP needed for current level, go ahead and try it)

Resurection is way much easier, and very remmeniscent of the reset button (no one said all the differences were good points).

The system is much more modular, making it easier to drop additional rules in or change existing ones without throwing the entire system out of whack.

There are aspects of 3e, i.e. CR and EL, that make the game easier for the novice GM and the novice player to GM.

There are other differences as well, but I think I've hit the major ones here.

 

[Oni]

Bloodymage, that is simply my opinion and I know that not everyone agrees with that, but I didn't think it was necessary to explicitly state that. Holding an opinion on a subject does not mean your closeminded. I try hard to listen to what other people have to say, and I hope no one here would accuse me of dismissing people out of hand simply because I disagreed with them.

 

[maddman75]

In what way is resurrection easier?

In 1e and 2e raise dead and resurrection were both available. They cost a point of con for raise, and nothing for res.

In 3e, these are available, as well as the 9th level true resurrection. Ninth level spells are damn hard to come by, and the only time I've made them available is when the group was on a mission relating to a powerful church (available meaning they'll do in in exchange for a 'donation')

In addition, both raise and res cost a level. While it is true that you couldn't get CON back in the old version, players are loathe to give up levels, especially as they may be gaining levels in different classes to build their concept.

 

[Spatula]

Hey Oni! Take a look at your sig! 3e is not better. It's different (not to say it's a different game, though I voted yes), and you may prefer it, and more power to you for that. I reserve a certain derogatory term for people who claim they're preferred gaming system is "superior." Open thy mind, young one.

Having an open mind doesn't mean you can't form an opinion.

I've played all the previous editions of D&D, and 3E is a better RPG than all of them - for what I want out of an RPG. For pretty much the same reasons that I liked AD&D better than OD&D back in the day...

I voted Yes, because while a lot of the ideas and concepts are still there, the game has does have a different feel for me. The biggest difference is the existance of real options in creating and developing characters, as well as the removal of a lot of the non-sensical limits and rules that plagued D&D characters in the past (multi-classing, dual-classing, level limits, etc.). Character advancement is faster. The combat system is more fully realized. Thieves aren't a worthless class.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

After playing 1e and 2e for well over 20 years, I was struck by how 3e was essentially the same game, but streamlined and improved, often in ways House Ruled by a lot of us back in the old days. So, yeah, I think it's the same game, improved. Obviously "improved" means I think it's superior. But so what? I think Axis and Allies is superior to Risk, but that's just my personal taste. If someone finds another game, or edition, superior, that's cool by me.

 

[WayneLigon]

I wouldn't say it's a 'different game'. no. Cleaner, faster, easier to play, not so filled with illogical assuptions and holdovers from the 'screw the players any way you can' era of game design. Easier to customize, as was mentioned by someone above; that's the major thing I like about it. As for 'better', yep. I think it's far better than 2E, which was a welcome change from 1E. Finally, I thinl I have a version of D&D I can live with comfortably for quite some time to come. 2 years now, and I haven't felt a need to create a 'house rule' for anything. That makes it worth the price of admission right there.

 

[Numion]

Maybe 3e is a different game.

And frankly, all the better for it.

 

[Sanackranib]

same game . . .

I said no, we used the skills and powers options for 2nd in my game and that had a decidedly "champions feel to it. with AC, saves and skill checks all counting up rather then down the game makes more sense now, but it's differnt enough to be its oun entity.

rollplaying is rollplaying and 3e will be easier for somone with RP exp. to pick up then for somone without it.

 

[Nifft]

DC can apply to saves and traps and looks just like AC vs. attacks. Non-combat situations have CRs which are comparable to combat CRs, and give XP just like combat does.

Monsters are people, too. They can take levels in classes and otherwise act just like other NPCs.

It's a different game, but IMO a better one.

-- Nifft

 

[dcollins]

In what way is resurrection easier?

Previous editions had an unavoidable percentage change that resurrection would not work, and that the character would therefore be irretrievably dead forever. Based on Constitution, this chance was some 25% at Con 10.

In addition, there was a hard limit on total resurrections allowed over a PC's career -- their starting Con score, unchanged by any later bonuses or improvements. (See AD&D 1st Ed. PHB, p. 12.)

In my 3rd Ed. campaign, I found this sufficiently important to re-institute by virtue of a house rule: www.superdan.net/housrule.html