Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5761826" data-attributes="member: 22779">Whereas I find the first option horribly restrictive.  Mostly because the rules can't possible cover all the "Here's how you can change it" options.  My issue with 3e (well, one of my issues, my primary issue simply being time investment- 3e expects too much homework for the DM for me) is that 3e tries to pre-define virtually every aspect of any event in the game.  I don't need that.  I'm perfectly capable of coming up with my own definitions and I'll think you'll agree that there are a number of players that are in the same boat.I want the rules to tell me the mechanical stuff that happens - this power hurts this much, and then get out of my way.  From experience, the difference between the two approaches isn't all that large most of the time - the baseline assumptions are baseline for a reason:  They work most of the time.  But, having to shoehorn my game into what the game designers think my game should look like isn't my cup of tea and hasn't been for a really long time.There's a reason I got out of 1e D&D when I did.  I jumped ship as soon as 2e came out because 2e was more open ended than how I interpreted 1e which I saw as primarily being about dungeon crawling and kill'n'loot ((Note, that was how I interpreted the game, not necessarily how the game actually was)).  3e was huge breath of fresh air because it gave me mechanics that actually worked out of the box.  Unfortunately that came with the cost of hours and hours of prep work outside of the game to try to keep my campaign alive.  4e has solved that problem by being WAY easier to prep.Heck, how many times have you hit someone with a bench in 3e?  In nearly ten years of playing 3e, I never, ever saw an improvised weapon used.  In 4e?  Easy peasy.To me, that's cool.  The mechanics direct the story, but don't provide the script.  In 3e, the mechanics provide the script and that's not what I want anymore.But, I think that's the whole point.  It never occured to me to question the viscousity of lava.  I really, really don't care.  It's a cool scene and that's good enough for me.  The problem with saying "no" via nodding to realism, as this thread has well shown, is that the line that people draw is very much not grounded in anything remotely resembling actual facts, but in gut reaction.Again, how do you set mechanics that are so subjective?  People want fireballs to be hot enough to melt gold, but, not burn the victim naked every single time (which it most certainly should).  They want 6 impossible things before breakfast but reserve the right to quibble over the 7th.  And nobody agrees what the 7th one actually is.The designers really are damned either way.</blockquote>

Verification