Is 3e a GM Nightmare? Rules and beyond!

[Belen]

Hey all,

The troubles with 3e have slowly been dawning on me for the last few weeks, such as my post on the social skills, and an even earlier one about GM burnout. So I have to ask. Is 3e a nightmare for GMs? I think it is a valid question and I will highlight the reasons that I think 3e can be bad for GMs.

Rules: 3e has more rules per pound than any other edition of DnD. In fact, the rules cover so much that a GM must know them hands down or suffer truly dire consequences. A GM who misses the beat even once can easily watch a game collapse.

1.) Such extensive rules give players a lot of ammo when arguing over a GM call. In fact, do any of you remember needing to consult the books so often in previous editions? My group goes through this all the time and it really causes problems during game play!

2.) Rules rather than roleplay: The social skills have really taken a beating in 3e. Yes, I understand (and partially agree) with the argument that it gives socially inept players a chance to play social classes, but half of DnD is learning to socialize, so die rolls are only harming the game! High level social skills are also broken! The charts say that DC 40 is nigh impossible, but I have 17th levels PCs who can routinely hit a DC 40.

3.) 3e- the PnP PC game: Anyone else notice how close 3e gets to a computer game? It encourages combat far too much at the expense of roleplaying. Die rolls should never take the place of social aspects of the game, yet they seem to be gaining more popularity. 3.5 is worse in that they went so far as to codify names! Did Improved Invis really need to be Invis, Greater?

4.) GMs have a lot more to do and consider than in past games. Monsters can now have levels. PCs can be half anything, but are usually just half- @$$ed. Every level can be a debate with your players. Yes, the encounters can be wildly different, but so much more work has to go into mechanics these days that you need to spend twice the time to have a good story and good encounters.

5.) There are so many rules that even players get lost. Unless a rule is used every session, then no one can keep track of them. This means that a GM, just to have a smooth game, had better constantly re-read the same material. Mastery, my tail end! The large number of rules makes Mastery almost impossible.

For me, DnD is not about die rolls. Yes, they are important, but I GM because I like to roleplay. I like to play a variety of characters and I love to create stories. When my half my prep is learning arcane mechanics and my sessions are five hours of social and combat DIE rolls, then I am unfulfilled.

Anyone else think that 3e may be a bit too rough on GMs?

Dave

 

[Belen]

Forgot!

Yes, 3e is great for players. They have so many options that they can make whatever characters they wish and really add flavor to them. However, the numbers of options causes further problems for GMs. I mean, how do we keep up with the game and all the options and combinations that players find to make uber characters!?

The amount of information a modern 3e GM needs to process is staggering.

 

[Planesdragon]

1.) Such extensive rules give players a lot of ammo when arguing over a GM call.

Just invoke Rule 0: The DM is always right. Oh, and pick yourself up (or make) a good reference screen.

AD&D has a lot of rules too, and they all worked differently--and didn't cover as many situations as 3e does.

2.) Rules rather than roleplay

Two simple ways to fix this.

1: Disallow skill-boosting items for social skills. (I'm leaning more and more towards "a item has ranks that doesn't stack with yours" as a solution.)

2: Require roleplaying instead of rolling a d20. If a player uses a narrative cop-out ("I walk up to the guard and ask him where the King's private bathroom is"), he gets a low number (1-5) + his modifiers. If he roleplays it well ("John--is it John? Well, I've got a very important message for the King, and I don't think that it can go through the normal channels in time. Can you show me the King's John?"), he gets a high number (15-20)

3.) 3e- the PnP PC game: Anyone else notice how close 3e gets to a computer game? It encourages combat far too much at the expense of roleplaying. Die rolls should never take the place of social aspects of the game, yet they seem to be gaining more popularity. 3.5 is worse in that they went so far as to codify names! Did Improved Invis really need to be Invis, Greater?

AD&D was a total combat game. It didn't encourage roleplaying--it just didn't really deal with it.

As for changing the names--it makes for a much better spell chapter, though there's still room for improvement. And IMO, the darn spell names shouldn't be character knowledge, either.

4.) GMs have a lot more to do and consider than in past games. Monsters can now have levels. PCs can be half anything, but are usually just half- @$$ed. Every level can be a debate with your players. Yes, the encounters can be wildly different, but so much more work has to go into mechanics these days that you need to spend twice the time to have a good story and good encounters.

Very, VERY simple way to fix this: If you don't like monsters with levels, don't use them. If you don't like PCs being half anything, don't let them. If your PCs want to debate you, just put your foot down and say "nope, doesn't fit the world."

(And on a side note--a good story evolves from player action. It isn't written by the GM ahead of time.)

5.) There are so many rules that even players get lost.

If you don't like the plethora of rules, don't use them. Reduce all skill checks to a single chart, eyeball AoO, and just use what you can easily remember. The game will still work as long as the players still have fun. (Just try and be consistent.)

For me, DnD is not about die rolls.

Dungeons and Dragons is, was, and always shall be a hack and slash roleplaying game. The mechanics can be used almost as easily as any other system for a different flavor of game, but D&D IS a die-rolling, kick-in-the-door game.

If you want an RPG that's rules-light and story-based, pick up Exaulted or Hunter from White Wolf. Both are fairly close to D&D in flavor, and very rules-light comaratively.

 

[Crothian]

No, I don't.

1) Players should argue a DM's call at the table. There are times and places for discussing the rulkes but in the middle of a session is not the time. It can derail the whole night. Write a note and discuss it afterwards or via e-mail.

2) We role play rather then worry to much over the rules, so I don't have or know of this problem.

3) Again, I don't think it encourages combat. THis is all in the style of game you want to run.

4) No where does it say you have to allow everything. You don't have to give monmsters levels. You don't have to allow PCs to have templates.

5) Did I mention you don't have to use everything? And if you find rules are tough make a cheat sheet of the ones you use.

6) No, it is not DM verse PC unless you play this way.

 

[Belen]

Crothian,

I use crib sheets, I do not allow everything, but even core books only can provide a high number of options. My opinion is the 3e, in general, is much more difficult to GM than past versions of the game.

Plane,

I fear White Wolf games. Never likes WW. I do like d20, but I posted this thread because it seems that so many people are burning out in the current version than had trouble in the past...

Dave

 

[Urbannen]

3.) 3e- the PnP PC game: Anyone else notice how close 3e gets to a computer game? It encourages combat far too much at the expense of roleplaying. Die rolls should never take the place of social aspects of the game, yet they seem to be gaining more popularity. 3.5 is worse in that they went so far as to codify names! Did Improved Invis really need to be Invis, Greater?

It has taken me 3 years to get a strong handle on the rules, and that is with lots of studying and reading message boards. I'm still not at 100%, however. D&D tries to have mechanics to cover most situations. The mechanics are hard to learn and remember. Yes, D&D is more like a computer game. That's one reason I kind of like it, I guess. 3.5 has made things better because a lot of things have been clarified, but still it's a lot to get your mind around.

The question begs: Why do you continue to play 3rd edition? If you want a DM-friendly, role-playing centered game, you would be better off with a different system, such as 2E (which you already know), Basic D&D (my preference if 3.0 didn't exist), or a non-D&D game.

 

[jasamcarl]

Hey all,

The troubles with 3e have slowly been dawning on me for the last few weeks, such as my post on the social skills, and an even earlier one about GM burnout. So I have to ask. Is 3e a nightmare for GMs? I think it is a valid question and I will highlight the reasons that I think 3e is a bad version for GMs.

First, let me say, that in five years of running constant 2e campaigns, I never faced burnout issues. In fact, I did not burn out for the first time until after my first year long 3e campaign. While I think that 3e is a superior system to 2e, I must wonder if it does not make a GMs life tougher.

Rules: 3e has more rules per pound than any other edition of DnD. In fact, the rules cover so much that a GM must know them hands down or suffer truly dire consequences. A GM who misses the beat even once can easily watch a game collapse.

1.) Such extensive rules give players a lot of ammo when arguing over a GM call. In fact, do any of you remember needing to consult the books so often in previous editions? My group goes through this all the time and it really causes problems during game play!

2.) Rules rather than roleplay: The social skills have really taken a beating in 3e. Yes, I understand (and partially agree) with the argument that it gives socially inept players a chance to play social classes, but half of DnD is learning to socialize, so die rolls are only harming the game! High level social skills are also broken! The charts say that DC 40 is nigh impossible, but I have 17th levels PCs who can routinely hit a DC 40.

3.) 3e- the PnP PC game: Anyone else notice how close 3e gets to a computer game? It encourages combat far too much at the expense of roleplaying. Die rolls should never take the place of social aspects of the game, yet they seem to be gaining more popularity. 3.5 is worse in that they went so far as to codify names! Did Improved Invis really need to be Invis, Greater?

4.) GMs have a lot more to do and consider than in past games. Monsters can now have levels. PCs can be half anything, but are usually just half- @$$ed. Every level can be a debate with your players. Yes, the encounters can be wildly different, but so much more work has to go into mechanics these days that you need to spend twice the time to have a good story and good encounters.

5.) There are so many rules that even players get lost. Unless a rule is used every session, then no one can keep track of them. This means that a GM, just to have a smooth game, had better constantly re-read the same material. Mastery, my tail end! The large number of rules makes Mastery almost impossible.

5.) 3e encourages player vs. GM play! nuff said.

For me, DnD is not about die rolls. Yes, they are important, but I GM because I like to roleplay. I like to play a variety of characters and I love to create stories. When my half my prep is learning arcane mechanics and my sessions are five hours of social and combat DIE rolls, then I am unfulfilled.

Anyone else think that 3e may be a bit too rough on GMs?

Dave

Oh jeez...I can't deal with this irrational argument again..

Let me make this clear: most of the problems you listed are your own and does not reflect the quality of this version versus any other. Your contention that not following every rule would lead to dire consequences is especially laughable. God knows there was never a need to fudge in earlier editions.

Too many options?!!! God, why must the system make me so anal as to utilize each and every one?!!!!!

 

[The_Gneech]

Try Fantasy Hero for about three years, then come back to D&D ... I think you will find it quite simple to grasp and execute.

But you'll still hate building monsters with levels.

-The Gneech

 

[jasamcarl]

Oh and let me add....i wouldn't want to play with a GM who prefers to play with shoddy rules, just because that makes his fiat essential. That tells me that he does really want an interactive or gamist experience, but wants to dictate a story.

 

[DaveMage]

I love the ruleset, but as a DM, the only thing I hate is the time it takes to create an NPC according to the rules.

Yes, I know I can streamline some of it, but to do it by the rules, takes far too long. That's why a good electronic tool would be so helpful for DMs using third edition.

I'm hoping e-tools eventually gets to the point where it does all it's supposed to do for 3.5, but even then since it does not include all of the supplements, it would be time consuming to use that as well.