I've finally figured out why 3rd edition bugs me

[Starman]

The replies to this thread demonstrate the difference between role-players and war-gamers. I'm sure you can figure out who is who.

I'd beg to differ. I certainly love role-playing when I'm playing D&D (or any other RPG, for that matter). While the flavor is nice in the 2ed version, it doesn't give you any clear rules. The 3ed version on the other hand does and I am free to create whatever kind of flavor I want for crafting scrolls (or doing anything else) in my game.

Starman

 

[Turjan]

A little bit of flavor could be a great thing in moderation but what Sebastian posted just kept going forever. I'd be really unhappy if I read 2 pages of flavor text on how to do something that takes 2 sentences to explain.

Hmm... I see your point. Who wrote the 2E stuff? As much as I see Monte Cook as one extreme, the other cook (David "Zeb" Cook) falls into the opposite category: the rules are shaky, and the flavour text goes for ever and ever and ever...

 

[DonaldRumsfeldsTofu]

How the hell do you put women's funeral lamentations in an ink? And isn't crocodile tears and water from an ocean just, you know, water, and not ink? And isn't the nature of the writing what's magical, not the ink? And isn't it immoral to harvest the blood of a creature with human intelligence for ink?

I'll take the accountant textbook, very much.

 

[Turjan]

How the hell do you put women's funeral lamentations in an ink? And isn't crocodile tears and water from an ocean just, you know, water, and not ink? And isn't the nature of the writing what's magical, not the ink? And isn't it immoral to harvest the blood of a creature with human intelligence for ink?

I'll take the accountant textbook, very much.

You know, this is called a "fantasy role playing game", not "soft matter physics" . Just as a reminder .

 

[Liquidsabre]

Right, 3.x is but a fully functional game, a rules template, to which our imaginations can drape with the colorful fantasies of dramatic roleplay and high adventure.

Don't listen to those who fed off the 2e flavor like a pack of sordid vampires, but let *your* imagination shape your game with your own style and flavor rather than fed to you page by inumerable page of text...

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Right, 3.x is but a fully functional game, a rules template, to which our imaginations can drape with the colorful fantasies of dramatic roleplay and high adventure.

Don't listen to those who fed off the 2e flavor like a pack of sordid vampires, but let *your* imagination shape your game with your own style and flavor rather than fed to you page by inumerable page of text...

I don't know if that was meant to be sarcastic or not, but if not, I agree with it 100%.

 

[Vanuslux]

While I enjoy war games, I prefer my role-playing sourcebooks to be straight forward in their presentation for a completely different reason. I have my own imagination...most fluff is usually rather obvious and bland anyway. For example, the quoted section of the 2nd Edition DMG tells me nothing that anyone but the most wet behind the ears newbie fan of fantasy fiction should be able to dream up. When I look to a general role-playing supplement I want the building blocks that I can use as the foundation of my own imaginings. The only time I appreciate fluff is when it is in a setting specific supplement...and it better not be generic fantasy drivel.

 

[Creamsteak]

Right, 3.x is but a fully functional game, a rules template, to which our imaginations can drape with the colorful fantasies of dramatic roleplay and high adventure.

Don't listen to those who fed off the 2e flavor like a pack of sordid vampires, but let *your* imagination shape your game with your own style and flavor rather than fed to you page by inumerable page of text...

Wisdom.

The core books are just that. They are pretty bare bones, except perhaps the monster manual. I think that setting based products are more for what your "missing from 3e."

In some low magic setting (or at least in a setting where crafting a scroll is indeed a great challenge, say perhaps crafting a 6th level spell when your only able to cast 3rd level spells), that "substance text" helps set a mood and provide the challenges of the game.

See, if you look outside the core books (or Gygax forbid, create your own), you can find the same sort of content as that first passage quoted in the first post of this thread. Even stuff like the Eberron CS provide this "flavor text" your looking for. Dragonshards in Eberron are your Gorgon's blood and Cockatrice feathers. The PHB and DMG are just there to set up the mechanical system more than anything else.

 

[hong]

The first one sounds like a pain in the ass.

Actually, the first one is telling me stuff that I either knew already, if I wanted to make an activity a central part of roleplay; or is useless, if I just want to get on with other stuff. 2E had a wonderful gift for taking the obvious and making it sound quasi-profound. Clearly David "Zeb" Cook missed his calling as a writer of self-help books.


Hong "is still waiting for the 7 Habits of Highly Effective Munchkins" Ooi

 

[Naathez]

Here's my 2 cents...

I DON'T MISS 2nd edition. AND yet I do agree that the 3rd edition rules are lacking in atmosphere.

But... -building up suspence-

It is OKAY that they are. I don't think it's the book's JOB to give me atmosphere, flavor, "fluff", feeling.

It's MY job. The book's job is to give me a set of guidelines (hereafter called RULES) by which I can make so that actions don't succeed or fail at my (or anyone's) whim, but are influenced partly by luck and partly by skill.
More or less, this thread's originating comment (no offense is meant, I partly understand the spirit behind it, and am just trying to explain my feelings on the matter) is like saying

"How atmosphere-less it is.... the book says that, to determine whether I hit the troll, I just have to have a weapon in hand.. and then proceeds to explain I roll a d20, add some bonuses and subtract some penalties, and then I compare the result to the troll's AC to see if I hit."

Yes, it IS flavorless. But it doesn't need to be any different.
I like to use MY ideas with the mechanics provided, it's MY world.

But let's keep this conversation rolling....

(One thing.... I might be touchy. But that comment about "So now you know who's the wargame player and who TRULY plays RPG" sounded a little too elitist to me... and frankly I always find elitism A) a little offensive, and B) a little out of place in what I believe should be a friendly community. There's already all kinds of people convinced we're nerdy losers OR satan worshippers cause we spend a few hours each week pretending to be magic-casting elves. No need to start setting up separations in between ourselves.)