Kits versus 3E...

[rounser]

As to kits - on the whole, they were completely worthless, excluding those which threw the whole game out of balance, which were worse. They were a name, and very little else. I always remember thinking "hey, maybe there's a kit which matches my concept", looking up said kit and going "wow, that was a waste of time. I could have guessed that I needed those proficiencies, and I personally can't see why people would just suddenly know that I'm an >insert kit here< and give me lodging/change their reaction to me".

Anecdotes about bad implementation are just that.

Significantly more value would have been obtained from just listing a number of archetypes and giving a short paragraph describing their role in history or fiction.

You mean like the Hero Builder's Guidebook?

 

[Larcen]

Larcen - comparisons between editions are, at best, worthless. Especially when you're comparing something which has changed as much as hitpoints. A 200hp smackdown in 2e would kill gods. In 3rd ed, it wounds a dragon. There's a little bit of a difference there. ...

Funny you should say that. It reminds me of another thing I noticed between the various editions.

If things have more HPs in 3E, why were damage spells not changed to keep up? A fireball still does what is was doing back in 1E. Less actually, since now there are dice caps. Same thing to some extent for the Powerwords.

In fact, it used to be that you could do more damage with spells and spellcasters were the heavy hitting artillery of the group. I think it's now very easy for fighters to do more damage in a round, albiet to a limited amount of targets, than the group's spellcaster.

An example of this powershift is the PC I am currently playing. My cleric has no spell available to him that has better damage potential overall than his greatsword. Which suits him just fine actually due to his background.

Sure, he is a cleric and so hasn't much in the way of flashy high damage spells, but if the game world got tougher in terms of HPs, then at least arcane damage spells should have too. No?

So now we have: "Ah, the good old days when a wizard-rushing fighter actually feared the inevitable Lightening Bolt that was to follow. Now he might as well try shocking him with static."

 

[Larcen]

... Back in the old days, even novice players took that 1-8 points of damage an orc did in stride, and they were no longer scary after 1st level. It took me introducing a critical hit system to make them scary back then.

Well, back in the OLD old days, a 1st level fighter had a d8 for hit points and he had to ROLL it, none of this max stuff. And to make matters worse, you rolled your CON on 3d6, period. Every try to go up against orcs with a fighter with 1 HP? THATs scary.

 

[MerricB]

If things have more HPs in 3E, why were damage spells not changed to keep up? A fireball still does what is was doing back in 1E. Less actually, since now there are dice caps. Same thing to some extent for the Powerwords.

Because magic-users were so much better than fighters in 1E.

The idea of 3E was to make all classes consistently useful over the entire progression. Thus, wizards had their power reduced (or it stayed the same, wrt 2E), fighters, rogues and clerics were increased in power.

Cheers!

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Sure, the previous editions had deadly combos too, but 3E being so relaxed in it's restrictions, and allowing PCs to fly up the XP charts, is almost screaming for abuse.

It not abuse; It's written that way on purpose.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I like it - this hearkens back to the recipes idea of Ryan Dancey a couple fo years ago.

The biggest disappointment about all the class books, for me, is that they didn't really do anything with Ryans Recipe idea. It would have been so much better than churning out endless inane prestige classes, to have provided directions and sets of feats (or whatever) to attain certain iconic types of character.

Ah, lost opportunities.

 

[Saeviomagy]

As to kits - on the whole, they were completely worthless, excluding those which threw the whole game out of balance, which were worse. They were a name, and very little else. I always remember thinking "hey, maybe there's a kit which matches my concept", looking up said kit and going "wow, that was a waste of time. I could have guessed that I needed those proficiencies, and I personally can't see why people would just suddenly know that I'm an >insert kit here< and give me lodging/change their reaction to me".

Anecdotes about bad implementation are just that.

Can you give me a kit which didn't do one or more of the following:
1) Utterly changed the class such that it probably should have been an entire new class (the blade)

2) Give a nonsensical bonus/penalty based on the target of the ability happening to know the exact kit the character had (ie the various amazon kits, peasant hero etc)

3) Was nothing more than a suggestion as to which proficiencies to take. (some 80% of the kits)

4) Gave something for no penalty (usually bonus proficiencies - again, some 80% of the kits)

5) Isn't duplicable by playing 3rd ed and picking appropriate skills and feats.

Significantly more value would have been obtained from just listing a number of archetypes and giving a short paragraph describing their role in history or fiction.

You mean like the Hero Builder's Guidebook?

Yup.

 

[Ravellion]

If things have more HPs in 3E, why were damage spells not changed to keep up? A fireball still does what is was doing back in 1E. Less actually, since now there are dice caps. Same thing to some extent for the Powerwords.

True, but less bad than you think: Wizards now shoot up the XP charts faster, and have more spells per level due to bonus spells for high int. This will make them last more encounters. A first level grey elf specialist (or Spellcasting Prodigy) could have 4 1st level spells, and 3 cantrips. Con bonusses starting earlier maeks them less fragile because of the d4 hitdie. I remember an 8th level 2nd edition wizard who had 16 Hitpoints (yes, lots of 2s). Also, there now is a possibility to cast two spells in one round with Quicken Spell (and Haste, for a few more months )

Rav

 

[Plane Sailing]

True, but less bad than you think: Wizards now shoot up the XP charts faster, and have more spells per level due to bonus spells for high int. This will make them last more encounters.

Actually, in the previous editions there was some real strangeness in the xp charts - while wizards needed the most for 2nd and 3rd levels, and after they'd reached about 10th level, for the mid level range they needed less than the fighter!

at 7th level:
Fighter 64,000
pal/ranger 75,000
Wizard 60,000
druid 35,000
rogue 40,000

for 10th level
Fighter 500,000
pal/rabg 600,000
Wizard 250,000 (!!!!!!)

It was only at 14th level that the wizard and the fighter needed the same exp (1,400,000), and at 18th level they caught up with palading/ranger requirements (3,000,000)

So the new xp charts actually makes things *slower* for the wizard compared to the old 2e days! Who would have thought it?

Cheers

 

[rounser]

Can you give me a kit which didn't do one or more of the following:
1) Utterly changed the class such that it probably should have been an entire new class (the blade)

2) Give a nonsensical bonus/penalty based on the target of the ability happening to know the exact kit the character had (ie the various amazon kits, peasant hero etc)

3) Was nothing more than a suggestion as to which proficiencies to take. (some 80% of the kits)

4) Gave something for no penalty (usually bonus proficiencies - again, some 80% of the kits)

5) Isn't duplicable by playing 3rd ed and picking appropriate skills and feats.

No, I can't. But then again, I haven't played 2nd ed in years, and I always took the broken kits.

Again, just because you think they were badly implemented proves bugger-all. Implement them well already! And I've already argued about the duplication by skills and feats thing earlier in this thread, and can't be bothered to again - the short version is that prestige classes wouldn't exist if everything they do could be duplicated by feats and skills.