Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="francisca" data-source="post: 1972435" data-attributes="member: 9734">Approaching D&amp;D from a quantitative POV certainly did not start with 3E.&nbsp; There has always been a portion of D&amp;D gamers who have viewed it as a numbers game.&nbsp; The term min/maxer was around before 3E, for certain.Having said that, in my opinion, the 3E core/SRD is more enabling of the quantitative approach than 1E core (PHB/DMG/MM), or basic/expert, as everything is laid out for you with feat chains, skill synergy, etc..&nbsp; (I have never really utilized much outside of the core for 1E, and never played any variant of 2E, so can't address those)Personally, I like a little bit of quantitative approach, but not so much that it's all about pre-planning feats, skill points, and classes from level 1 to 20.&nbsp; I personally do not care for the idea of a &quot;character build&quot;.&nbsp; I can think of no greater example of the quantitative apsect of 3E than the legions of message board posters asking for and giving opinion on their character builds.&nbsp; That's not a put-down, BTW.&nbsp; Number crunching D&amp;D is just as valid and potentially fun way to play the game as any other.&nbsp; It's not my favorite, but I'm just one guy, you know?(speculation begins)I'm sure this is by design.&nbsp; Back when D&amp;D was the only game in town, and when it was even more of a 400lb gorilla, many folks who were not numbers oriented left the system for others which are more story based, lighter on archetypes, etc...&nbsp; What is left then, is the core D&amp;D fans who like the quantitative (and tactical) approach to D&amp;D.&nbsp; Hence, I think wizards is simply marketing to their audience.(specualtion ends)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="francisca, post: 1972435, member: 9734"] Approaching D&D from a quantitative POV certainly did not start with 3E. There has always been a portion of D&D gamers who have viewed it as a numbers game. The term min/maxer was around before 3E, for certain. Having said that, in my opinion, the 3E core/SRD is more enabling of the quantitative approach than 1E core (PHB/DMG/MM), or basic/expert, as everything is laid out for you with feat chains, skill synergy, etc.. (I have never really utilized much outside of the core for 1E, and never played any variant of 2E, so can't address those) Personally, I like a little bit of quantitative approach, but not so much that it's all about pre-planning feats, skill points, and classes from level 1 to 20. I personally do not care for the idea of a "character build". I can think of no greater example of the quantitative apsect of 3E than the legions of message board posters asking for and giving opinion on their character builds. That's not a put-down, BTW. Number crunching D&D is just as valid and potentially fun way to play the game as any other. It's not my favorite, but I'm just one guy, you know? (speculation begins) I'm sure this is by design. Back when D&D was the only game in town, and when it was even more of a 400lb gorilla, many folks who were not numbers oriented left the system for others which are more story based, lighter on archetypes, etc... What is left then, is the core D&D fans who like the quantitative (and tactical) approach to D&D. Hence, I think wizards is simply marketing to their audience. (specualtion ends) [/QUOTE]

Verification