Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="francisca" data-source="post: 1864546" data-attributes="member: 9734">Let me add to this that I have witnessed this very thing in LG.&nbsp; I sat and saw a guy roll a knowledge check, and the DM told him it was OK to pull out the MM and read up on the monster we were facing.&nbsp;&nbsp; I asked the guy if this was normal.&nbsp; He said something like: &quot;Well, we got cheat books for Diablo and all the CRPGs, here we have Knowledge checks.&quot;Looking around the room (there were 5 or 6 other groups), this seemed to be the normal style of play, even outside of LG. I asked the DM about via an e-mail later.&nbsp; He confessed to being an old-school gamer, and he didn't like that, but it seemed to be the defacto way that stuff was handled in LG, so he just rolled with it.Now, it is concievable that under 1E, a Cleric could cast commune, but that spell was limited to Yes/No answers.&nbsp; Off the top of my head, that is about as far as I think it could have gone, given the way the rules are writtenStill, when I'm running a 3.X game, there is no way in hell I'd let a player look through the MM.&nbsp; So, I'm not bound by the rules to do so.&nbsp; (And I still have rule 0.)&nbsp; However, I still contend, with everything designed/formulated/balanced, 3.X does enable a particular kind of play (per above), if not outright encouraging it, in a way that the previous editions did not.&nbsp; Couple that with the ever increasing array of &quot;kewl stuff&quot;, the &quot;cheat book/save game&quot; mentality that many players have, it's no wonder many decry 3.X as &quot;videogamish&quot; and the province of munchkins.Edit: For those of you who play that way, I hope you are having a good time.&nbsp; Knock yourself out.&nbsp; I'm not trying to put you or your playstyle down.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="francisca, post: 1864546, member: 9734"] Let me add to this that I have witnessed this very thing in LG. I sat and saw a guy roll a knowledge check, and the DM told him it was OK to pull out the MM and read up on the monster we were facing. I asked the guy if this was normal. He said something like: "Well, we got cheat books for Diablo and all the CRPGs, here we have Knowledge checks." Looking around the room (there were 5 or 6 other groups), this seemed to be the normal style of play, even outside of LG. I asked the DM about via an e-mail later. He confessed to being an old-school gamer, and he didn't like that, but it seemed to be the defacto way that stuff was handled in LG, so he just rolled with it. Now, it is concievable that under 1E, a Cleric could cast commune, but that spell was limited to Yes/No answers. Off the top of my head, that is about as far as I think it could have gone, given the way the rules are written Still, when I'm running a 3.X game, there is no way in hell I'd let a player look through the MM. So, I'm not bound by the rules to do so. (And I still have rule 0.) However, I still contend, with everything designed/formulated/balanced, 3.X does enable a particular kind of play (per above), if not outright encouraging it, in a way that the previous editions did not. Couple that with the ever increasing array of "kewl stuff", the "cheat book/save game" mentality that many players have, it's no wonder many decry 3.X as "videogamish" and the province of munchkins. Edit: For those of you who play that way, I hope you are having a good time. Knock yourself out. I'm not trying to put you or your playstyle down. [/QUOTE]

Verification