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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="John Quixote" data-source="post: 5394575" data-attributes="member: 694">My story is really very similar.  I was elated with 3e, because it seemed to fix so much of what was arbitrary or outdated in 2e.  And as it turns out, I should've just kept on playing 0e, because that version of the game is way more congenial to my freewheeling play-style.  I found this out back in 2007, when I started getting really fed up with how complicated 3e could be at high levels, and after trying 2e again and then C&C and not liking either very much, I gave the Basic Set and Rules Cyclopedia a spin and fell in love all over again.  So for the last three years, my gaming has been as much of a blast as it was when I first started playing back in high school.I've just come off of DMing a game session where the players have explored about 90% of the Keep on the Borderlands (only a few rooms in the Chaos Shrine remain).  It's really stunning, I think, how compared to the more combat-focused editions, the auld game is really more about exploring and interacting with the game-world.  It feels like it's more about having adventures than fighting battles.As for quirks and arbitrary rules... well, I give credit where it's due.  Since I spent so many years playing 3e, some of that d20 System game design philosophy has become second nature.  So when I play 0e, I still do a lot of tweaking and streamlining to make the rules simpler.  I have only one Saving Throw stat instead of five, for example, and I invented a whole skill system based around all the little rules that involve rolling a d6 to do or find something ("find secret doors on 1 or 2 on 1d6," &c.).  The game runs like a well-oiled (and very familiar) machine.The game I really want to play?  I do what any self-respecting DM would.  I picked the edition I liked best and tweaked it until it was mine.</blockquote>

Verification