Is it DnD, or MtG? (General Griping)

[Herremann the Wise]

Is it me, or do these new DnD rules (3.0 & 3.5) seem to be going the way of Magic: the Gathering?


It used to be "This is how I stopped Lord soandso while in the Temple of Truely bad things!"

Now it's "if you mix this with that, and add some of tihs, no one can touch you!!"

Do any of you see the same 'evolution', or am I just missing AD&D too much??

I actually agree with you - having been quite the magic player (I came 3rd at States year before last).

Maybe some non-MtG players don't quite realise it but essentially this is why:

- In MtG, there is a rule to cover everything. There is not a single thing you can do that is not covered by some rule - and yes the official rule book is absolutely massive (over 100 pages I think).

- In 3rd Ed. this same philosophy has been picked up - that is there is a correct ruling on just about everything.

Maybe it's just me but the flavour of pre-3rd ed. was more about the skill of the DM to come up with something logical. If they made a judgment, knowbody bothered really arguing about it. Rule Zero was at the fore. You said "I want to jump up, swing on the chandelier and put the boot into the bad guys head". You didn't worry about the mechanics behind it - that was for the DM to sort out. Now players are forced to have a better grasp of the rules.

I suppose it is like that quote in someone's sig about the rules serving the game, not the game serving the rules. Unfortunately, we seem to have lost that concept to a point.

However, having said that, I really prefer 3rd Ed. But then I enjoy MtG too. Maybe 4th Edition will try to get back to a more rootsy approach to gaming - but I doubt it.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Orius]

4) What irritates me a little with 3.0/3.5 is the vast Sargasso Sea of PrC's out there. Its a minor irritation, but still... Customization options are great. But I think the feat mechanic is a better way to go --of course, there's a Sargasso Sea of them too.

I think that's a problem with the DM — not with the rules. Sure there's plenty of PrCs and feats out there, more than anyone could ever use. But the DM is ultimately the one who decides which options are allowed in his campaign and which ones are not. It all goes back to rule #0. That's why PrCs are in the DMG, not the PHB, because allowed PrCs are the DM's call. They're there in part as a way for them DM to customize the campaign. There's a reason the splatbooks say at the very beginning of the books that the material is optional, and that players should check with the DMs before using it.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I don't. There were no guidelines as to what treasure was appropraite; it was just what you rolled or picked. 8th level characters could easily have a staff of the magi, an item which is considered artifact level power.

On the other hand it never got out of control in our campaigns - you might find a 10th level wizard with a staff of power or staff of the magi but so what? The fights were as hard, the victories were as sweet.

Giving out vorpal swords to 2nd level warriors was obviously a no-no, but the "treasure equivalence" has greatly reduced the specialness of magical treasure in my experience - partly because you often "can't" be given any of the gosh-wow items at levels below 10th now if the DM is following the guidelines (and that is what the guidelines are -for- after all!)

Cheers

 

[ph34r]

My Level 16 Elven Cleric (Archer) won World Championships! Thanks Sultans of Smack!

 

[The_Universe]

I think that this philosophy:

Now it's "if you mix this with that, and add some of tihs, no one can touch you!!"

is not so much a matter of CRPGs influencing the game as it is due to the influx of options into the game.

Second edition, in my experience, had much of the same problem, with the Complete Books of X.

Third edition doesn't speak to min/maxing because it resembles a videogame. It speaks to min/maxing because there are finally enough options to create characters in nearly every niche imaginable.

By making the game easier to use and customize, it may have become more accessible to those who wish to power game - but I also think it's become more accessible to people who want to tell a story, since the lack of enforced, "all elves do X" means that *your* elves can do whatever the hell you like.

 

[Sebastian Francis]

Of course, now I'm a 3e "grognard" who isn't very interested in 3.5, but there you have it...

Hey, me too! Cool.

Long live 3.0!!!

And seriously, in 15 years from now when all the young punks are opening their shiny new Player's Handbooks for D&D 6th edition (actually, it'll probably be at least 10th edition by then), I'll leaning forward in my rocking chair, yelling out, "Eh? What's this 6th edition crap? What's this new-fangled nonsense? In my day we had Armor Class and Base Attack Bonus and we liked it just fine!"

 

[Sebastian Francis]

Quick, get me a flask of oil and a torch...

***

Look, there's a dead horse, hand me a stick...

***

YAWBT (Yet another WOTC Bashing Thread).

Look, ma! Over there! Clutching his shiny new COMPLETE ARCANE and combing eagerly through the boxes of random minis! It's....

YAOWFB (Yet Another Oversensitive WotC Fanboy)

 

[painandgreed]

I don't know about being like M:tG, maybe more like Hero Clix. There is certainly a slide towards making it more like a miniatrures combat game. Typically, I like this and it helps combat but the game seems to have been dumbed down in various other parts not related to combat to me.

 

[Sejs]

There is certainly a slide towards making it more like a miniatrures combat game.

All the while moving farther and farther away from its roots as ... a miniatures combat game.

 

[Storyteller01]

WOW!! A huge reply is such a short time! Thanks for the replies folks!

I should exress myself a little better.

As I understand it, MtG is based more on manipulating the equation than any actual storyline. I see the same with D&D now. Don't get me wrong, I love 3.0 (since it clasified a lot of unanswered questions) but a lot of the suppliments seem to focus more on the math of the game instead of the intent.

Also miffed about the 3.0 to 3.5. Also seems very MtGish, with rules changes used every edition or 'new originals' (rememebring that many of the PrC's found in the 'Complete [enter class here]' series have been published in Dragon or another suppliment previously).

NOTE: THIS IS NOT A "ONE EDITION IS BETTER THAN THE OTHER" TAG. Just bringing up the concept. I love ideas presented in both editions.

Again, I'm griping. I've always preferred the flavor text to the math...