Is the D&D fanbase too divided?

[LordofIllusions]

Do you? I thought it was a nice touch too.

In any case, if you're going to rant about the atmosphere amongst gamers not being very sociable and being too divided, while simultaneously insulting many of us here and essentially telling us that we don't play the game right, you have to expect that kind of thing to happen.

I did not directly attack anyone here, unless they attacked me first. Moreover I can state what I think is the best way for the game to be played, I can also state the myriad problems with the current splats without pointing a gun at anyone like you did.

Again you are attempting to assert that anyone whom does not agree with your opinion is here attacking others. I don't have to agree with you nor do I. I still fail to see how you went way off topic and started making this a personal for tat though. It's childish....really.

The solution to gamers being too divided is to be more accepting and tolerant of the tastes of other gamers, after all. Or perhaps that line is too serious and doesn't really belong in this thread.

So the solution to the rules lawyer is to be more accepting of him stalling games and slowing dow the action to argue with the GM? The solution to the video gamer that is only playing tabletop D&D till the next video game comes out is to make D&D into a tabletop video game?

The solution to stopping thieves in the real world is to let them steal? Oh come on.....get real!

~~~

 

[Mort]

Nah man. 3E is rules intensive. 2E has nowhere near the amount of mechanical rules as 3E.

~~~

While the rules can certainly get over bloated - I'll take the core 3e rules over the core 2e rules any day. Besides the 3e rules set, problems and all, is much clearer than the 2e rules set ever was and clearer rules are usually more important than amount of rules.

Just an example: In 2e my friend wanted to play a quarterstaff using fighter. Well if you can remember that far back, there were no mechanics for making a quarterstaff fighter the least bit effective (at least none that we had access to). Result - he had a sucky fighter and that interfered with his roleplaying because to him a sucky fighter just wasn't fun.

In 3e there are more options (such as making that quarterstaff fighter actually worth something) more options = more fun which = better roleplaying.

 

[LordofIllusions]

You're honestly claiming that 2E supported roleplaying more than 3e - I think that's an unsupportable position. Especially considering 3e introduced the SRD and OGL so other companies can help with the "roleplaying" side of things - there have been some pretty good products as a result.

1. Yes I am.

2. That's your opinion.

3. The SRD is nothing but empty mechanics. There is absolutely nothing roleplay intensive about the SRD.

~~~

 

[Zimri]

I consider myself a roleplayer. All of my characters have a decent enough background for adventure hooks (only a few of which have ever been "village razed by humanoids and I seek vengence/orphaned yada yada yada). I LOVE all the new feats, prcs, races, and base classes. Sure I can make a character function just fine without them, but they allow my characters story and actions (what they can actually DO and how well they can actually DO it) to mesh better.

As to gamers being a more divisive lot now than they were before I would have to disagree. I still have arguments with people over "alignment tongues" and I can't remember what edition that was from.

Further Ravenloft (IMNSHO)is a completely different beast than any other setting or edition. It was done remarkably well and was very well detailed "story wise" and it was easy for it to be when it started (though it was the demiplane of dread) it was for all intents and purposes (and population wise) a village. It takes alot more to apply the depth and breadth of a setting the size of a village to "worlds"

 

[Crothian]

Moreover I can state what I think is the best way for the game to be played, I can also state the myriad problems with the current splats without pointing a gun at anyone like you did.

Then please do that.

 

[Desdichado]

I did not directly attack anyone here, unless they attacked me first.

I never said you directly attacked anyone. I specifically said that you offered a handful of blanket insults.

Moreover I can state what I think is the best way for the game to be played, I can also state the myriad problems with the current splats without pointing a gun at anyone like you did.

I pointed a gun at someone?

Again you are attempting to assert that anyone whom does not agree with your opinion is here attacking others.

No I didn't.

I don't have to agree with you nor do I. I still fail to see how you went way off topic and started making this a personal for tat though. It's childish....really.

Well, it would be if that's what I'd done. All in all, I've been fairly amused by this thread. I think it's funny that you call for gamers to be more cohesive while yourself working as hard as you can to divide them.

So the solution to the rules lawyer is to be more accepting of him stalling games and slowing dow the action to argue with the GM? The solution to the video gamer that is only playing tabletop D&D till the next video game comes out is to make D&D into a tabletop video game?

The solution to rules lawyers--if you don't like playing with them--is not to play with them. Rules lawyers have always existed in every edition of the game and in every other game I've ever played as well. In my opinion there is nothing about d20 that encourages rules lawyers specifically.

The solution to stopping thieves in the real world is to let them steal? Oh come on.....get real!

Huh? What does that have to do with anything?

 

[LordofIllusions]

While the rules can certainly get over bloated - I'll take the core 3e rules over the core 2e rules any day. Besides the 3e rules set, problems and all, is much clearer than the 2e rules set ever was and clearer rules are usually more important than amount of rules.

I agree partially. The 3E rules are overly extensive, when it comes to builds. When it comes to roleplaying though they leave one quite hungry.

In 3e there are more options (such as making that quarterstaff fighter actually worth something) more options = more fun which = better roleplaying.

WotC loves hearing stuff like this.

Here is the truth: More options = More extensive builds not better roleplaying.

~~~

 

[Plane Sailing]

Too much shrillness!

Mod-sense going crazy!

must... lock... thread....

- if you've got any question about this, please email me

 

[Rel]

3. The SRD is nothing but empty mechanics. There is absolutely nothing roleplay intensive about the SRD.

~~~

That, my friend, is the point. 3E was designed to be a system around which plot could be added to taste. Games can be made more or less roleplaying intensive as desired while still maintaining a common frame of reference from a systemic standpoint.

We GET that you don't like it. Lots of people don't. Lots of people didn't like 2E, would not play it and breathed a sigh of relief when 3E came out. I was one of them.

If the D&D fanbase was "too" divided then, then I suspect some will think it is "too" divided now. This is obviously not the end of the world.

 

[Rel]

Also, as is obvious, I can post to locked threads as a moderator. Therefore my opinion is the correct one.