Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Guest&amp;nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 9255153">In some ways, 3E is the edition, maybe with the exception of 4th, that to me feels the least at odds with what the OP is talking about, at least in terms of there arose more of a culture of players impacting the setting through things like their character creation choices. I liked 3E but two of the things that I started to grow weary of it with were 1) the culture of play that emerged where the GM was more like a chef giving players what they ordered (i.e. magic item wish lists for builds) and 2) the parity between monsters, NPCs, and&nbsp; PCs. On the one hand, it is impressive they achieved this. Lots of people liked it, but it made prep and running the game much harder IMO and could impinge on GM creativity. The big difference from what the OP is talking about though is in 3E most of how you influence setting and story are through your build and through understanding the ins and outs of the system itself. Players with system mastery developed a lot of power in that respect. I think you are right to mention the role of system mastery here. Of course one downside of system mastery was it did create disparity in peoples experiences. As a GM, I really had to up my game and master the system just to run the thing (and you always master a system as GM but the degree to which you had to have command of the full array of mechanics was a lot more demanding than any other edition I have played)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Guest 85555, post: 9255153"] In some ways, 3E is the edition, maybe with the exception of 4th, that to me feels the least at odds with what the OP is talking about, at least in terms of there arose more of a culture of players impacting the setting through things like their character creation choices. I liked 3E but two of the things that I started to grow weary of it with were 1) the culture of play that emerged where the GM was more like a chef giving players what they ordered (i.e. magic item wish lists for builds) and 2) the parity between monsters, NPCs, and PCs. On the one hand, it is impressive they achieved this. Lots of people liked it, but it made prep and running the game much harder IMO and could impinge on GM creativity. The big difference from what the OP is talking about though is in 3E most of how you influence setting and story are through your build and through understanding the ins and outs of the system itself. Players with system mastery developed a lot of power in that respect. I think you are right to mention the role of system mastery here. Of course one downside of system mastery was it did create disparity in peoples experiences. As a GM, I really had to up my game and master the system just to run the thing (and you always master a system as GM but the degree to which you had to have command of the full array of mechanics was a lot more demanding than any other edition I have played) [/QUOTE]

Verification