Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MonsterMash" data-source="post: 2698907" data-attributes="member: 12974">It's funny seeing all the 3e lovers stating how much more evolved their editon is compared to earlier D&D editions, but ignoring how RuneQuest2 pretty much had everything that 3e brought to D&D (Unified mechanics, comprehensive skill system) and some more (usable system of hits to particular areas vs armour)./ducks waiting for inevitable flames! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> Hopefully this thread will continue as constructive discussion rather than degenerating into an edition war. My take is that compared to technologies, especially the ones I deal with in my day job as an systems analyst, games do not actually become outdated as such, but rules can evolve (e.g. chess, the way it is played now has been fairly static for a while in terms of rules, but there would have been a period before that when things were changing).In terms of D&D 3e in many ways is a break with earlier editions of D&D because of the thing that I like most about it: unified mechanics, but retains the Vancian magic, level based advancement, iconic races and classes of earlier editions.</blockquote>