OK, here's my can o' worms question!

[Ravellion]

I'll play any streamlined RPG, though I am also slowly moving towards simple over complex. I really want to DM Fudge, but I think my players would kill me.

I dislike "quirky" systems, with very different rules for different actions. The problem is that these systems end up with me ignoring the rules of the game and rolling percentile dice a lot .

In all fairness though, I'll probably play D&D in its most current incarnation till I am sick of roleplaying. I really like adventure support. Same reason why I'll never switch to Mac or Linux - software! (games).

Rav

 

[HERBO]

The game is what you make it

I don't personally feel that the rules system matters at all. I remember being completely thrilled with Dungeons and Dragons, AD&D1st, and AD&D 2nd. The Cyber Punk system rules all, and so does the non-d20 Deadlands system. I will always be of the opinion that "If you have pizza soda and an adventure ready, lets roll some dice!"

I do appreciate what the OGL has done for gaming in general though. People can spend less time concocting dice systems, and now anybody with a good idea can put it out there for the world and not have to worry about being sued 'til armageddon comes and trumpets sound (anybody remember the old Archmage expansion for AD&D? TSR sued their pants off)

Cheers Y'all,

 

[Treebore]

OK, here is another perspective, or at least an attempt to polarize things a bit.

If 3E is such an awesome rules set, then why doesn't everyone love it? Why do I have so many problems with it to the point I am switching to DMing with a different rules set? Why are a fair number of other people doing it?


I see it as being analogous to liking pepperoni pizza but hating mushroom pizza.

I don't like 3E the best simply because it has become too complex. When I think of how many hours I have spent in the last week writing up about 8 mid-level PC's for my 3E game, I get ticked off. It just hits me how much easier it was, and is, using other rules systems to DM a fantasy game. I have always wanted simple, but fun. I got that with all of the older editions. Even 2E, because I ignored the optional books.

I could do 3E with just the "core" books. That makes it much easier for me, but that cheats most of the players I have had in my groups since 2000. They buy these other books with the hopes/expectations of getting their moneys worth. I can't, in good conscience, tell them they can't use that $20.00 or $30.00 they bought.

My bottom line is that I have realized I spend way too much time prepping for my 3E game. I'll be happy to play under other DM's, but if anyone wants me to DM they'll have to be willing to play with a rules system I want to use. One that I only need a couple of hours to prep for, not 10 or more.

So even though I like 3E, it isn't my favorite. I certainly don't consider it the best system ever designed. It is one of the top 5 or so. Maybe even one of the top 3. But I have found many other systems that are just as good for different reasons. Some of them simpler, some of them even more complex.

It also sounds like I am very fortunate in having money and time to play other RPG systems. I am also fortunate to be able to walk away from DMing a system that I have bought over 200 books and modules for, plus counters, pdf's, battleboxes, battlemats, miniatures, etc...

I am certainly not one who thinks there is "the best" system out there either. Just a few that I have fun DMing/GMing/Refereeing/CKing/etc..., and even more that I like to play in.

 

[driver8]

Ill play anything if its fun and Ill try out just about everything at least once.

In the last couple of years Ive sort of leaned toward rules lite stuff, Basic DnD, Savage Worlds, and now Castles and Crusades. Partly out nostalgia, party out of simplicity.

That said I by now means hate d20 or 3e. Its a very good system, and obviously popular and successful. And the OGL is just great for gaming in general as far as producing settings, stand alone games, or generating fluff.

And besides whatever you feel about the mechanics of this edition of DnD, its hard to duplicate the iconic feel of the game.

Besides, any rules set that attracts such individuals like those that hang out here is ok by me.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

If 3E is such an awesome rules set, then why doesn't everyone love it?

Aaaaaaaaand ... The TOP 10 Reasons Not Everyone Has Embraced their 3.X Overlords ARE:

#10. Because some people are dumb!

#9. Inordinate fear of d20s!

#8. Draft dodgers see WotC on the books' covers and get nervous!

#7. Too busy "scoring" with "chicks"!

#6. Their hat know no limit!

#5. Because their Handle Animal skill isn't high enough to Take 10 when training the advanced hit-dice riding dog for a special purpose!

[...awkward pause...]

You know, they can't teach an old dog new tricks! *eyebrow wiggle*

#4. d12, d12, d12!

#3. Because if everyone loved it, what would those nerds on ENWorld argue about day after day?

#2. Speaking as a devotee of White Wolf's amazingly in-depth and role-playing-focused gaming systems, I'm shocked and appalled at the level of violence and casual apathy amongst all D&D players. True apathy must be worked for! Struggled for! The ennui of the damned does not come easy!

AAAAAAAAnd the Number 1 reason that Not Everyone Has Embraced their 3.X Overlords is:

#1. Because, uh, seriously, it's a game. Some people like Risk, some people like Castle Risk, and some people like Risk 2049 (or whatever that new-fangled, screwed-up version is called, of which my hat know no limit).

 

[driver8]

#1. Because, uh, seriously, it's a game. Some people like Risk, some people like Castle Risk, and some people like Risk 2049 (or whatever that new-fangled, screwed-up version is called, of which my hat know no limit).

Original Risk is the only Risk that matters; all other editions are just poor imitations.

(Couldnt resist)

 

[DaveMage]

If 3E is such an awesome rules set, then why doesn't everyone love it?

The thing I love and hate the most about 3E is the complexity.

I love the tactical nature of the combat - but I hate the fact that combat takes so long.

I love the complexity of building high level characters - but I hate the fact that it takes so long to do so.

So, to sum up, I love the system, but I hate the time it takes to enjoy the system.

Unfortunately, the thought of going back to an earlier edition (such as 1E or 2E) or trying a "rules-lite" system like C&C turns me off because I'd miss the detail and complexity.

I need to win the Florida lottery so I could stop working and concentrate on D&D.

 

[Treebore]

I need to win the Florida lottery so I could stop working and concentrate on D&D.

I think any of us would be happy to win any major lottery and do that.

 

[Psion]

OK, here is another perspective, or at least an attempt to polarize things a bit.

AKA, "stir up trouble".

If 3E is such an awesome rules set, then why doesn't everyone love it?

Because different people like different things?

Does that answer the question?

I mean really, substitute this for just about any other preference-laden product or endeavor. "If Lord of the Rings is such an awesome movie, why doesn't everyone love it?" "If Gone With the Wind is such an awesome book, why doesn't everyone love it?", etc.

 

[A'koss]

I'm firmly in the d20 camp but should point out that I have no compunctions about borrowing good ideas from other systems (eg. Earthdawn) that I can massage into the system. My own game definitely leans more in a "scarce magic" direction and now that there are more options out there to support that kind of game, the incentive to buy pure "D&D" material has certainly waned somewhat.

I remember when I first looked at an Alternity promo insert, probably in Dragon Mag, and thought - whoa, this is what D&D should be like! And largely it did end up that way. I believe the d20 core ideals will be around for a long, long, long time before something else will be able to supplant it.

Cheers!