Reynard
aka Ian Eller
(alos posted on rpg.net, to cover all the bases)
This isn't a rant, but rather more of an appreciation thread. See, I am running this D&D campaign that plays about once a month on average. There was a longer than average break between the two most recent sessions, however, and as I am wont to do, I started thinking too much about how big of a pain D&D is to run, and how simpler games and one shots might fit my lifestyle (what with the one yar old, and all) better. Then, the last session really rocked -- all the players made a good time for everyone, all the PCs shined (shone?) in their individual niches, and even the unexpected, vexing actions by the PCs added to the fun.
Now, I tend to run games fast and loose, even ina campaign like this which is something like an Epic Quest (if a game centering around a group of black hearted mercenaries who love only gold and power can be called such). I sta out the baddies, create a very loose plot outline, and then allow my players to run rampant in our sandbox. Sometimes I even remember to make notes on the names of NPCs, locations, and other stuff I come up with on the fly. Sometimes, when I don't, I pay players in XP for reminding me...
What does this have to do with the intracacy of D&D, you might ask? Well, now that I am all excited again, and the situation in the game has becomne suddenly very, um, multifacetted, I have begun statting out a number of disparate groups of "monsters" and NPCs (all of whom want a pound of the PCs' flesh, at least). In doing so, I found myself flipping through four or five different books (the current campaign is limited to official WotC 3.5 products, plus a couple rules from Unearthed Arcana) and just when I thought I was going to get all frustrated by the process, I was actually pleased and impressed.
What I began to realize (finally, we arrive at the thesis) is that the "crunchy" or "rules heavy" or "less kind description" of D&D is not only a strength, but an impressive feat (ha!) in and of itself. While I realize that there are indeed some "broken" feats or spells or classes in even WotC products, and a few of the systems for certain kinds of actions (like spot check range penalties!) are, to be kind, not how I would have done them, the system is intricate: it has many parts that fit together in ways that make the whole thing work wonderfully. It seems like a small and simple thing, but that regeneration, for example, works the same for a troll as it does for an oger mage is a design feature that makes sense and needed to be there. That creature "types" and "subtypes" indicate certain abilities or rules relative to those creatures is an example of this intricacy, as are the vast numbers of items, powers, and class abilities that reference existing spells. When designers, WotC or third-party, apy attention to this intricate fabric, new material blends seemlessly. When it is ignored in favor of some new rule or effect, it starts to break down into "brokenness" or worse.
Now, I am not suggesting that the pieces of the game are indivdually or universally perfect, but rather that they fit together wonderfully and this, I think, is the greatest strength of the game. I may still grumble that it takes too long to create a 15th level "boss" villain that is only going to lasta few rounds against the PCs, but at least I know that said villains abilities mesh with the game system and the PCs -- even if I decide to move away from the standard, so long as I consistenly apply the existing options.
On a final note, I will say that it isn't HERO or GURPS (or your favorite point0buy system). It doesn't have to be, though, because I am not trying to model any random thing, I am trying to modl some D&D thing, or thing I think should be in my D&D game.
This isn't a rant, but rather more of an appreciation thread. See, I am running this D&D campaign that plays about once a month on average. There was a longer than average break between the two most recent sessions, however, and as I am wont to do, I started thinking too much about how big of a pain D&D is to run, and how simpler games and one shots might fit my lifestyle (what with the one yar old, and all) better. Then, the last session really rocked -- all the players made a good time for everyone, all the PCs shined (shone?) in their individual niches, and even the unexpected, vexing actions by the PCs added to the fun.
Now, I tend to run games fast and loose, even ina campaign like this which is something like an Epic Quest (if a game centering around a group of black hearted mercenaries who love only gold and power can be called such). I sta out the baddies, create a very loose plot outline, and then allow my players to run rampant in our sandbox. Sometimes I even remember to make notes on the names of NPCs, locations, and other stuff I come up with on the fly. Sometimes, when I don't, I pay players in XP for reminding me...
What does this have to do with the intracacy of D&D, you might ask? Well, now that I am all excited again, and the situation in the game has becomne suddenly very, um, multifacetted, I have begun statting out a number of disparate groups of "monsters" and NPCs (all of whom want a pound of the PCs' flesh, at least). In doing so, I found myself flipping through four or five different books (the current campaign is limited to official WotC 3.5 products, plus a couple rules from Unearthed Arcana) and just when I thought I was going to get all frustrated by the process, I was actually pleased and impressed.
What I began to realize (finally, we arrive at the thesis) is that the "crunchy" or "rules heavy" or "less kind description" of D&D is not only a strength, but an impressive feat (ha!) in and of itself. While I realize that there are indeed some "broken" feats or spells or classes in even WotC products, and a few of the systems for certain kinds of actions (like spot check range penalties!) are, to be kind, not how I would have done them, the system is intricate: it has many parts that fit together in ways that make the whole thing work wonderfully. It seems like a small and simple thing, but that regeneration, for example, works the same for a troll as it does for an oger mage is a design feature that makes sense and needed to be there. That creature "types" and "subtypes" indicate certain abilities or rules relative to those creatures is an example of this intricacy, as are the vast numbers of items, powers, and class abilities that reference existing spells. When designers, WotC or third-party, apy attention to this intricate fabric, new material blends seemlessly. When it is ignored in favor of some new rule or effect, it starts to break down into "brokenness" or worse.
Now, I am not suggesting that the pieces of the game are indivdually or universally perfect, but rather that they fit together wonderfully and this, I think, is the greatest strength of the game. I may still grumble that it takes too long to create a 15th level "boss" villain that is only going to lasta few rounds against the PCs, but at least I know that said villains abilities mesh with the game system and the PCs -- even if I decide to move away from the standard, so long as I consistenly apply the existing options.
On a final note, I will say that it isn't HERO or GURPS (or your favorite point0buy system). It doesn't have to be, though, because I am not trying to model any random thing, I am trying to modl some D&D thing, or thing I think should be in my D&D game.
I like d20 D&D. (You could probably find a quote where I say I don't like it, but it was either hyperbole or just because I didn't want to go into a lengthy description of my opinion of it.) I'm impressed by it. I'll happily play when a friend chooses to DM it.
