Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="harmyn" data-source="post: 2645638" data-attributes="member: 13511">I've got to agree with Odhanan on this point. I have run everything from the moldvay/cook basic D&D book up through 3.5 and OD&D/ClassicD&D/AD&D 1st ed/2nd ed were all a heck of a lot easier to teach than 3.0/3.5. Your explanation of mechanic was a little simplified and your posting of old rules exagerated. For starters the new rules would go more like this, roll a d20 add your stat bonus, your skill bonus, don't forget to check for your synergy bonus, (and those feats, did you include those bonuses?) and you do want to roll high. The target number is listed on pg such and such --- no its not as as simple as saying a 20 or 25 is good enough, the target number is dependent on the individual skill involved --- they have their own little charts for that. Now I have exagerated it as well, but not as much as you did.I do like the new game, but given my druthers I would happily go back to classic as it is much more free-form and rules lite allowing for much more player and DM creativity should anyone wish to flex that muscle. The tight modern rules can restrict far more easily than they inspire. And the 1,001+ threads on every class is broken but the commoner and this book is biased and that company makes munchkins bloat on happy-crunch cereal support the argument about trying to build new original things and balance them into a game.But I have said enough.</blockquote>