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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Treebore" data-source="post: 1783360" data-attributes="member: 10177">I must be a good DM. My players and I played 2e for years, including a year after 3e came out. Of course I stayed away from the munchkin crap in the "complete" and "option" books and did my best to adjudicate gaming situations as sensibly as I could. So I guess I was playing 3e well before it even came out. Except my skill system was percentile based. Have to admit I like the 3e skill system better, especially with some house rules. But I have always strived to have my game world "make sense" along with the characters in them. 3e just gave me an easier game mechanic to do it with, along with my house rules, since there are plenty of things that still don't "make sense" in 3.x.BTW, "realism" is almost always why something doesn't make sense to a player or DM, so the closer to real the rules allow you to get, the more sense they will make. Of course then all the tables and situational modifiers will greatly increase the complexity of the system. Slowing it down to below a snails pace. So the bottom line is the trade off, playability versus realism. What is the balance? Depends on your fellow gamers and DM.As for switching to 3e, there is no real need. As long as you are playing an rpg, whether 3e, 2e, GURPS, Traveller, Shadowrun, RIFTS, or whatever, that is FUN, everything else is secondary. That is the main reason why my group played 2e and took a year to switch over. We were already having fun doing things the way we were so there was no pressing need to switch over immediately.</blockquote>

Verification