Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 1080724" data-attributes="member: 172">Nightmares are extensions of fears.Some fears are irrational.You said this isn't an edition war, yet your argument is based on a critical evaluation of 3e compared to other editions.I remember 1e being riddled with rather anal rules. Further, those rules were inconsistently implemented and ad hoc in nature.Contrast 3e. 3e is boiled down to a few fundamental mechanics as opposed to the dozens in prior editions. Much like prior editions, 3e has a lot of rules references in them. However, unlike the prior editions, they have this narrower base of rules as a consistent underpinning.For example, most skill or ability related checks are handled the same way. Need a new skill DC? You can easily make it up by the surrounding structure.Similarly, each spell or other effect draws from a consistent set of core mechanics. When a spell stuns someone, you don't have to rely on specific stun rules to guess how it works; all effects that stun pretty much works the same way. Once you know how one stun effects works, you have the others mastered.This makes it far easier, IMO, to master (and better yet, to manipulate) 3e than prior editions.This appears to me as so much histrionics.A GM has to learn to deal with rules calls in a quick and efficient manner. There is nothing unfair or tragic about that.Why does it need to be "ammo"? What is the problem with a consistent and robust rules set as an agreed upon medium to play the game. Dare I say, if you don't cleft to that approach, you are playing the wrong game?D&D is not a narrative game like OTE. The function of the rules is to provide a sort of "rules of reality" for the game to occur in. Some participants appreciate that approach.If the GM decides that a rule should be different, then that is within her authority. But the GM owes it to the palyers, AFAIAC, to keep players appraised of the most funamental rules of the shared reality they are playing.If rules are reduced to being "ammo", then it seems to me as if the problems lie deeper than the rules. You have an adversarial relationship between you and your players. That needs to be mended before you can even think about evaluating the worth of the rules.Yes. In fact, they were referred to much more, just because they were so much more convoluted and inconsistent.I recommend the 60 second rule. If you can't find the rule in 60 seconds, the DM makes a call and you live with it. Look up the rule after the game and learn it for next time.This has had entire threads devoted to it, so I won't dive into this wholesale again. To sum up my views:1) Integrate the roleplaying as a DC to the task but don't bypass the roleplaying.2) The social skills of the character should be at least as important in the game as those of the player, and silver tongues players should not be roleplaying their 5 charisma characters as silver tongued devils or they are not properly roleplaying their characters.No. Quite the contrary. Now that social skills are a core part of the game (instead of a tack on proficiency in some add on book), players are much more eager to use those skills in play. See #2 for how to turn that to your advantage.Dude, that is SO what sold me on 3e in the first place!Are you sure that you are the one that is arguing on the side of roleplaying here? In my old games, I primarily ran PC races (or races that could have classes, like Drow) as opposition, because I could craft 3 dimentional, interesting characters out of them. Monsters, I left as nuissance encounters since they were so cookie cutter.Now, I can craft any race into an interesting compelling villain or lackey! Bravo.Of course, nothing is making you give monsters levels now if you don't see the advantage in it.But AFAIAC, this is so much a "feature not bug." I honestly cannot at all sympathize with the view that more options is bad for their own sake.See above. The rules are so much more consistent now, I find the players don't get lost. I used to have a player who got involved during the 2e era, when saves and attacks were d20 high, ability and proficiency checks d20 low, thief skills percentile low, initiative d10 high. It is SOOOOO much easier to get players up to speed on the system now that I can, again, hardly beleive your perception is at all accurate.</blockquote>

Verification