Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Khur" data-source="post: 374454" data-attributes="member: 5583">That keyboard/mind interface...I love and hate the English language, especially when you're forced to convey what you're thinking in a medium that takes many times longer and is terrible at giving your recipient emotional information and other cues.Thanks for pointing out what I said so I can clarify. What I meant was: the time it takes to create the 3E stats for a character has no ramifications on the creativity involved in the process. It does have ramifications on the time involved. I would say that you can just spend more time on both stat creation and personality (and ect.), only drawing up a 10th-level fighter in 3E is so abysmally easy, that it shouldn't be a problem. This becomes especially true if you have the non-statistical info before you start on the stats. When I create characters, the rules don't decide what that character's going to be, my imagination does. So I have the personality, plot, and other ideas in place before I worry about the rules. Fortunately 3E as written is flexible enough to allow for most things, and places where it isn't can be glossed over. Not only that, the authors of 3E also suggest that you do so whenever you need to. Where the rules interfere with fun, ditch the rules. They even do this when making "official" material. Example: Hmmmm, the monk multiclass restriction prevents us from making Oriental Adventures characters like ones that appear in comics, movies, and stories. I know! Ignore the multiclassing rule! Brilliant. (Why they even included the restriction in the first place is questionable, but I digress.)You also have to remember that these rules were written with tournament play in mind.Anyhow, I did vote yes, and not for emotional reasons (for those who might think so). I don't agree with most of Sir Edgar's basic reasons for thinking D&D is mismanaged, because they have little bearing beyond the level of personal taste. (The website problem is another issue.)His personal taste IS important, because the game is supposed to be fun, not a chore. I'm not devaluing his opinions, even though some of them are highly personal points of view. But, WotC (the "official" manufacturer) can't please everyone all the time ... they HAVE TO aim at the middle of the road, and try to please most of the people most of the time. That's not an easy job, by the way, especially when you're dealing with over two decasdes of legacy material and legacy players. Those legacy players are usually very bright and opinionated people. But, many of those players will rant and rave about how this or that is just a money-grubbing rehash of 2E or 1E stuff. Others gripe and moan because their favorite spell from Wizard's Spell Compendium 4 wasn't included in the PHB. WotC can't win, even if they try to cater to one group or another, at least not with a single product.I will say that many products have enough good things in them to make them worth the price. A few don't (for my game). I have already stated that I FEEL some of the material that WotC has released is middling or worse, and not my desired type of FRPG. (Electricity shooting ballistas, anyone?)My perception of the mismanagement has more to do with business direction, then the fact that I think "The Druid In Perspective" section of Masters of the Wild wasn't very useful for me, or the fact that I have to buy the Psionics Handbook or the Manual of the Planes (or a certain copy of Dungeon) to get Githyanki 3E stats.Anyway, thanks for the opportunity to share my opinions and listen to yours. I think this poll served a good purpose, even if it's not scientific and a few people here are a bit rude. You get that everywhere, though.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

Verification