Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="barsoomcore" data-source="post: 1844602" data-attributes="member: 812">I think one could describe the 3E rules as &quot;D&amp;D for D&amp;D Players&quot;I'm not alone in having coming BACK to D&amp;D as a result of 3E -- 2E seemed like just a simple cash grab, lots of changes for no real reason, no vision, lots of &quot;DM - play THIS way&quot; sort of products, so I bailed and made up my own games, played Fantasy Hero and so on, or just stuck with 1E AD&amp;D.3E was just what I wanted -- a sophisticated, nicely integrated ruleset that applied a very small number of simple mechanics across a wide variety of applications. It felt like 1E but without all the impossible to understand or even use rules that filled the 1E texts.I don't need flavour -- my games are full of flavour, they're as far from wargaming as you can imagine -- since because the 3E rules are so straightforward, I don't need to remember them much. Whatever I rule on the spot, basing my judgement on the basics of the rules, is pretty likely to be close to the actual rules. So I can spend my time on what's FUN about DMing for me -- coming up with a rich campaign full of fun details, crazy NPCs, cool schemes and plots for the heroes to foil (or not).BUT....I think it's fair to say that having read Gary Gygax's wonderful, imagination-stirring material in OD&amp;D and 1e AD&amp;D had a big impact on me. He was a good writer, there's no denying it, and it was to no small degree that skill he possessed that got so many of us hooked.3E doesn't have that &quot;hookability&quot; that the earlier games had, I think. I'm not sure about that, but I can see where some people are coming from in this. The rules are clear, and I LIKE that, and it makes the game easier (and thus more fun) to play, but is it all really as attractive to the unwashed masses as earlier editions? I don't know.I do know that 1E PHB CALLED to me. I HAD to have that book. I HAD to play that game. I wonder if the 3E PHB does the same to inexperienced players.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="barsoomcore, post: 1844602, member: 812"] I think one could describe the 3E rules as "D&D for D&D Players" I'm not alone in having coming BACK to D&D as a result of 3E -- 2E seemed like just a simple cash grab, lots of changes for no real reason, no vision, lots of "DM - play THIS way" sort of products, so I bailed and made up my own games, played Fantasy Hero and so on, or just stuck with 1E AD&D. 3E was just what I wanted -- a sophisticated, nicely integrated ruleset that applied a very small number of simple mechanics across a wide variety of applications. It felt like 1E but without all the impossible to understand or even use rules that filled the 1E texts. I don't need flavour -- my games are full of flavour, they're as far from wargaming as you can imagine -- since because the 3E rules are so straightforward, I don't need to remember them much. Whatever I rule on the spot, basing my judgement on the basics of the rules, is pretty likely to be close to the actual rules. So I can spend my time on what's FUN about DMing for me -- coming up with a rich campaign full of fun details, crazy NPCs, cool schemes and plots for the heroes to foil (or not). BUT.... I think it's fair to say that having read Gary Gygax's wonderful, imagination-stirring material in OD&D and 1e AD&D had a big impact on me. He was a good writer, there's no denying it, and it was to no small degree that skill he possessed that got so many of us hooked. 3E doesn't have that "hookability" that the earlier games had, I think. I'm not sure about that, but I can see where some people are coming from in this. The rules are clear, and I LIKE that, and it makes the game easier (and thus more fun) to play, but is it all really as attractive to the unwashed masses as earlier editions? I don't know. I do know that 1E PHB CALLED to me. I HAD to have that book. I HAD to play that game. I wonder if the 3E PHB does the same to inexperienced players. [/QUOTE]

Verification