Desdichado
Hero
I may just have to add that to my sig!buzzard said:
Is 3e a GM Nightmare? Rules and beyond!
- Thread starter Belen
- Start date
Psion
Adventurer
And as I have already stated, your premise does not agree with that notion. The two are inseperable. Is 3e hard on GMs compared to what? We could talk about GURPS and OTE if you like, but your references were specifically to prior versions of the D&D game. To explain my position I must refute your assertions about the relative qualities of the editions.
D'karr
Adventurer
BelenUmeria said:Never said that I did not love 3e.In fact, I doo think it the superior system, and have spent a lot of hours arguing in the edition wars in favor of it.
This right here leads this thread into the Edition Wars - House Rules Strike Back realm. You say that 3e is superior. Superior to what?
Don't lead the thread in a certain direction and then complain when people keep bringing it to that conclusion.
Every single thread I've seen over the last couple of weeks relating to DM burnout has one thing in common. The DM burnout is being caused by the player's actions, not the rules.
To say that 3e is harder on DM's because they play with idiot players is somewhat misleading.
Once again I'd advise that you stop complaining about people hijacking the thread and making it an edition wars, when you are in essence the first to do so. Reread your first post for confirmation of that.
Mercule
Adventurer
Cybern said:
Never played Silhouette.
I can see what you're saying about Storyteller, though. My thought would be that it just breaks down in different areas. Some people like Storyteller, some don't.
My own position is that I love the WoD setting(s) and think the system encourages a certain, very appropriate, feel. That said, my group has termed the Storyteller system "the worst game system that remains playable." I'm not interested in converting the WoD to any other system, but I also wouldn't promote the Storyteller system to most other settings.
eryndel
Explorer
Belen -
What is it you are looking for in this thread? Is D&D harder on GM's then on players? Yeah, I think that's a no-brainer. I can't think of any game that is easier to run then play.
Is D&D harder on GM's then previous editions? I'm not sure if this is what you are asking because you keep insisting that this isn't edition wars, but I don't think it's any harder then previous editions and is easier at times. (IMO Unearthed Arcana really complicated 1ed and the Options did similar for 2ed).
Is D&D harder then other games? Now that really depends on the game but again I don't think thats what you are asking.
So, in regards to the first, I do think that GMing D&D can be hard but is made up by the fact that it's pretty fast and easy for players. D&D is a pretty ideal game to introduce a bunch of newbies to (if you're pretty confident at GMing). I don't mean to impunge your GMing expertise, I haven't been around here long enough to know. But if the rules seem to numerous, you only need to know the rules that you use. If you don't have any clerics, you can disregard the turn undead rules. No pugilists? then ignore the grappling. As long as your group is supportive in respecting your calls and then looking the rules up after the session.
I haven't had most of the concerns you've listed.
Just my thoughts.
What is it you are looking for in this thread? Is D&D harder on GM's then on players? Yeah, I think that's a no-brainer. I can't think of any game that is easier to run then play.
Is D&D harder on GM's then previous editions? I'm not sure if this is what you are asking because you keep insisting that this isn't edition wars, but I don't think it's any harder then previous editions and is easier at times. (IMO Unearthed Arcana really complicated 1ed and the Options did similar for 2ed).
Is D&D harder then other games? Now that really depends on the game but again I don't think thats what you are asking.
So, in regards to the first, I do think that GMing D&D can be hard but is made up by the fact that it's pretty fast and easy for players. D&D is a pretty ideal game to introduce a bunch of newbies to (if you're pretty confident at GMing). I don't mean to impunge your GMing expertise, I haven't been around here long enough to know. But if the rules seem to numerous, you only need to know the rules that you use. If you don't have any clerics, you can disregard the turn undead rules. No pugilists? then ignore the grappling. As long as your group is supportive in respecting your calls and then looking the rules up after the session.
I haven't had most of the concerns you've listed.
Just my thoughts.
Mercule
Adventurer
BelenUmeria said:
Oh, okay. Here's my answer on that:
Yes, 3E is harder on DMs than on players. Of course, _every_ system is harder on GMs than on players. Such is the nature of RPGs. Hero, Storyteller, ShadowRun, 1E AD&D, 2E AD&D, Paranoia, Aria, Aftermath, Amber, and any other game I've ever played has been harder on GMs than on players.
The real question you should be asking is "Is the ratio or gap between GM difficulty and player difficulty greater in 3E than in other games?" To which my answer is "no". It's about the same, maybe a bit less. There are, of course, exceptions.
You could always go "Zargon" HeroQuest, but even that is slightly harder on the GM than the players, especially after you run out of the pre-made "modules". Still, it's about as even as you'll see.
Piratecat
Sesquipedalian
I actually look up rules LESS in 3e. Way less. That because there may be a lot of rules, but they use a consistent mechanic: low is bad, high is good, like modifiers don't stack, DCs are always calculated the same way, etc. In previous editions I would never know, because so many things contradicted each other. I'm pleased to see that this is no longer the case, because when I don't know a rule I can apply a similar rule and be fairly sure that I'll be correct.
D'karr
Adventurer
Okay, let's analize this from the DM's perspective. What things do DM's have to do in 3e that might be harder?
Storytelling? Nope, same amount of work involved there as in any other game.
Rules? Nope. As a matter of fact I find the rules to be much easier to adjudicate since they all follow the same template. Just one core mechanic - roll d20 add modifiers beat a DC number. I don't see anything there that would have "dire consequences" if the DM messed up.
Game Preparation? Nope. Slightly more time consuming maybe, but on the average not any harder.
As a matter of fact I've found that game preparation in 3e is much simpler because some things are now somewhat quantified. In 1e I had to find out if a creature was an appropriate challenge for my players based on a) Experience, b) Trial and Error. Usually that meant that challenges were very skewed.
In 3e using Encounter Levels and Challenge Ratings, you have a pretty good idea of how chalenging an encounter will turn out. So 3e has simplified my preparation.
On most occasions 3e is easier to prepare for. Someone mentioned earlier that, "Statting a Great Wyrm is hard." I disagree it is not hard, it is time consuming.
However, how many times, in your DMing experience, are you going to do that? Once you've statted one do you have to do the same with each and every Great Wyrm? No, you can easily recycle. BTW, with the great amounts of NPC and other electronic generators available online even that chore is not as time consuming.
From a DM perspective, the question really boils down to "How much do you want to prepare?" I've run several sessions using just stock monsters from the MM and reocurring NPC's that I've created for other sessions.
The only part of game preparation that might be considered more involved is NPC creation. There are more skills and options involved. But those options, after all, are just optional. So if I create one town guard all my town guards, from that point on, can be the exact same - as far as stats are concerned. If I'm going to create the BBEG for a campaign I probably only have to create him once. So in reality how much time did that take?
Handling players? Now IMO this is really what Belen's argument revolves around. Is it harder to handle player's in 3e than before, or in other game systems? Again I think the answer is no. How can the game system be to blame for the stupid things that player's or DM's do?
If a player wants to play a half-dragon/quarter-slaad/quarter-halfling rogue/aristocrat, does the game system have "optional" provisions for it? Yes. Does the DM have to allow it? Absolutely not. How is the system to blame for the poor decisions that a DM might make?
In other editions and in other game systems the "option" doesn't exist. How does that make the game any easier for the DM? Taking away the possibility of screwing the game up doesn't make the game easier, it just makes it less interesting.
The two things don't have any relation one to the other.
If the DM wants to allow the "optional" guidelines then he is going to have to be mature enough to live with the consequences. And what DM in his right mind doesn't know that allowing the "half-dragon/quarter-slaad/quarter-halfling rogue/aristocrat" might cause problems?
The notion that 3e is harder because it allows more options is really preposterous. Since the options are after all "optional."
The other part of the argument is that 3e restricts roleplaying. I can't agree with that in any way. Can someone give an example that they've seen where 3e restricts roleplaying? I haven't seen one yet. Just because 3e now quantifies, with some skills, things that relate to roleplaying - how exactly does that restrict roleplaying?
Sorry but the answer is NO, 3e is not harder on DM's.
This coming from a DM that has been running a weekly game for three consecutive years and a second monthly game for the same period of time.
[Edit] Grammatical and spelling errors.
Storytelling? Nope, same amount of work involved there as in any other game.
Rules? Nope. As a matter of fact I find the rules to be much easier to adjudicate since they all follow the same template. Just one core mechanic - roll d20 add modifiers beat a DC number. I don't see anything there that would have "dire consequences" if the DM messed up.
Game Preparation? Nope. Slightly more time consuming maybe, but on the average not any harder.
As a matter of fact I've found that game preparation in 3e is much simpler because some things are now somewhat quantified. In 1e I had to find out if a creature was an appropriate challenge for my players based on a) Experience, b) Trial and Error. Usually that meant that challenges were very skewed.
In 3e using Encounter Levels and Challenge Ratings, you have a pretty good idea of how chalenging an encounter will turn out. So 3e has simplified my preparation.
On most occasions 3e is easier to prepare for. Someone mentioned earlier that, "Statting a Great Wyrm is hard." I disagree it is not hard, it is time consuming.
However, how many times, in your DMing experience, are you going to do that? Once you've statted one do you have to do the same with each and every Great Wyrm? No, you can easily recycle. BTW, with the great amounts of NPC and other electronic generators available online even that chore is not as time consuming.
From a DM perspective, the question really boils down to "How much do you want to prepare?" I've run several sessions using just stock monsters from the MM and reocurring NPC's that I've created for other sessions.
The only part of game preparation that might be considered more involved is NPC creation. There are more skills and options involved. But those options, after all, are just optional. So if I create one town guard all my town guards, from that point on, can be the exact same - as far as stats are concerned. If I'm going to create the BBEG for a campaign I probably only have to create him once. So in reality how much time did that take?
Handling players? Now IMO this is really what Belen's argument revolves around. Is it harder to handle player's in 3e than before, or in other game systems? Again I think the answer is no. How can the game system be to blame for the stupid things that player's or DM's do?
If a player wants to play a half-dragon/quarter-slaad/quarter-halfling rogue/aristocrat, does the game system have "optional" provisions for it? Yes. Does the DM have to allow it? Absolutely not. How is the system to blame for the poor decisions that a DM might make?
In other editions and in other game systems the "option" doesn't exist. How does that make the game any easier for the DM? Taking away the possibility of screwing the game up doesn't make the game easier, it just makes it less interesting.
The two things don't have any relation one to the other.
If the DM wants to allow the "optional" guidelines then he is going to have to be mature enough to live with the consequences. And what DM in his right mind doesn't know that allowing the "half-dragon/quarter-slaad/quarter-halfling rogue/aristocrat" might cause problems?
The notion that 3e is harder because it allows more options is really preposterous. Since the options are after all "optional."
The other part of the argument is that 3e restricts roleplaying. I can't agree with that in any way. Can someone give an example that they've seen where 3e restricts roleplaying? I haven't seen one yet. Just because 3e now quantifies, with some skills, things that relate to roleplaying - how exactly does that restrict roleplaying?
Sorry but the answer is NO, 3e is not harder on DM's.
This coming from a DM that has been running a weekly game for three consecutive years and a second monthly game for the same period of time.
[Edit] Grammatical and spelling errors.
Last edited:
