Rules Lawyers needed!

Hello again Knifespeaks,

If the above works for you and is what you and your group are used to then go for it. At first glance, it looks like a lot of work for the DM but I gather you know it like the back of your hand. As such, its both simple and intuitive for you.

Our group follows 3.5 pretty much to the letter. We extensively use miniatures and a battle map for all combats. I think with these tools, you would have found it not so clunky. We have a wife in our group who seems similar to one of the women in your group. She lets her husband or the DM guide her if the rules don't allow her to do what she wants. 3.5 is a bit confusing for her - although she does a very good job.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise
 

log in or register to remove this ad

knifespeaks,

I think what you're looking for is going to be 'Castles & Crusades' by Troll Lord Games.

It's based on the SRD so the game has some of the improvements that d20 has over 1st and 2nd edition AD&D, but it's said to have that 'old school feel' that those other games have. No battle map needed, much simpler initiatives (I think it uses a d6 or d10 or something), no AoOs or anything that makes d20 feel like a wargame instead of an RPG.

Have a look! Lots of people, including a lot of 1st and 2nd edition players, are giving it raves. (A collectors set is out now, and the actual PHB is due ~November.)
 

knifespeaks,

The combat system between 1st ed and 2nd ed remained pretty much intact so the comparisons work fairly well. IIRC one of the differences was weapons speeds introduced in 2nd ed.

I mentioned 2nd ed Player's Option: Combat and Tactics as a reference since it seemed to capture many of the things you wanted.

I would recommend trying to get a copy of it since it seems to me that it would help your game mechanics greatly. I mean if you are using casting time (in segments) for spells you might as well go the next step and incorporate the weapon speeds. The critical hit rules from C&T would also add some detail to your game (they also have rules for critical hits with spells too). You should be able to find at least an electronic copy of the book at SVGAMES for around $5, and I'm pretty sure that some copies can be found from ebay. The 3 player's option books (Skill and Powers, Combat and Tactics, Spells and Magic) are all included in the Revised Core Rules CD Rom - probably also available from ebay.

Yeah if you don't like the cinematic approach to 3.5 you won't really like anything about d20 since the whole premise of the system (in any rules set) is to make things more story telling and cinematic in theme. It gives the players a feel for being in an epic setting rather than in a rules-dice rolling game. What I mean is that what the players are doing can't be captured by mere pen and pencil, hence the cinematic theme, so that their actions transend the mere desk top and are forced to cross into the players' imaginations. Too manymechanics keeps people trapped in the dice and not looking beyond. But that is all up to the player/DM as to what they like.

I again say - don't mix the two systems. It will make for a real lengthy set of house-rules trying to bridge the gaps that will exist. 3.5 was specifically designed to be intergrated (unlike 1st or 2nd ed in which the mechanics seemed like mere add ons) so that if one thing is changed it has an effect on many more things and causes more house-rules to bridge that gap and so on.
 

Ok, well, I was pretty much a 1st Ed AD&D guy who plays 3.5 now so I'll throw something in here: In the words of Peter Venkman; "don't cross the streams. That would be bad."

If you like 1st Ed AD&D stick to what you got in the 1st Ed DMG. You won't need sunder unless someone tries to sunder something. Honestly, it never comes up in 3.5 unless someone elects to do it. And sunder doesn't just work on shields- it also works on objects, held items (like wands), enemy weapons, .. etc. It's a player-nominated tactic for specific situations.

I had the combat tables memorized from 1st Ed so I imagine you do too. In fact, I even had the page number (pg 75) memorized. It's a workable system, but it's kind of boring. I don't understand how you are using those tables with 3.0+ armor class rules. It must invalidate a lot of monsters and items. I also don't understand that- if you prefer things to be non-flashy, why you would want sunder rules, really.

Like most people here, I really do believe that if you convert everything to the 3.5 system you will have a better game and so will the players. Even the female ones. In fact- I highly suggest you take part in one or at least observe another group in play, or nominate one of your players to check it out for you.

3.5 is simply more playable, and I have a 6 year old son who plays with me every once in a while. I can't think of a better way to put it.
 

1st ed. vs 3.5

I agree with most of you, the 3.5 edition is the best combat system. That said, we don't use NEARLY all the rules, and i think that is where most people have the problem. The system is so robust and detailed, it undoubtably is more info per page than either 1st or 2nd edition combined. But after using the system for 3 or 4 years now, we've realized that you don't have to use every rule. For us, frequent AoO's bogged the game down, so we removed a lot of them. That meant a few feats weren't as useful, so players switch them out for other feats. We just tweaked it until we had a full fledged system we felt comfortable with that still conforms fully to the rules. Now, the only problem we really have with 3.5 is the spell level system, so we use a cobbled together spell point system (based on some other campaign settings and mechanics) that work just fine. The best part of 3.5 is its modular nature and the EXTREME adaptability of d20. No, it is definitely not a perfect system, but with some creativity it can and does incorporate every genre and style of gameplay. That is truly the beauty of d20, and in the future i'm sure designers will just continue to improve on it. It might not always be called d20 in the future, but it will have its roots firmly there.
 

One more suggestion. Read Green Eggs and Ham. Try it, you might find you like it. Then when your players get more interested in the game where they want to buy their own splat books like complete warrior, they won't be entirely confused and need to adjust everything to your house rules. And when they read through the PHB, they won't get interested in trying to use hit and run tactics with the rogue using tumble only to be told in the game session that they can't move that far and can't avoid the opponent's retaliatory strike. Some house rules are quite easy to play with and don't have far reaching effects. Changing the combat system seems like it will have further effects than you now realize. Of course you may try it and find that you don't like it... that is perfectly fine. It just pains me to read about your 'fixes' when they appear to only add needless details that aren't necessary. Fixing something when it only appears to be broken on paper is a mistake that many people do. Paper rarely gives a very accurate description of what an RPG game is really like.
 

I hear what you are all saying, and I thank you for the responses.

I still use the 3.5 to hit system, so AC = to hit roll. That alone is a massive improvement over the old 'to hit' tables from 1st. I read over the entire 1st combat system in the DMG, and then did the same with 3.5 out of the PH.

I simply cannot let go of there being no time in a 3.5 combat round :)

I also read over C&C at their official site and followed some threads about it on their forums - it looks intriguing, but I am not sure about it. Something about an old dog and new tricks :)

As for weapon speeds, look I acknowledge it can fit, but that is just too far :)

I did play 3.5 combat system for a bit - and I hated it :) Maybe that was the group, I don't know. But when I bought the PH and the DMG and read through it, the mechanics are sound, sure - but what inevitably strikes me is the characters at first level are just so powerful!

I am happy that mid to high level characters can do multiple things in a combat round - everything is simply considered a full round action. Lamoni, you mentioned the tumbling rogue - at 8th level, when rogues gain 2 attacks/round, tumble and attack! Prior to that, either one or the other. You can still move your full movement distance in a combat round, no worries.

The monsters likewise still have all their feats and skills, and I simply look at the full attack stats. I base all monsters off the fighter level (in general) - hence a 6 HD monster CAN do 2 actions/round.

The feat quicken spell scales a segmented casting time downwards and can be taken MULTIPLE times. Each 'rank' in quicken takes off a segment - with 1 segment spells being reduced to a free action (they take no time), allowing you to cast 2 spells a combat round, exactly the same as 3.5.

Many of you state the strength of 3.5 is it's adaptability. I agree - it easily fits into 1st. Trust me. I resolve combats as fast as 3.5 - faster, imo, as I don't have a battle grid (ugh, I cringe every time :) ) to worry about.

The campaign world incorporates all these ideas, by starting characters off at 0 level. No feats, limited skills, no class. I then roleplay it from there. If characters wish to gain a feat or a skill, they need to actively seek a teacher/trainer, or keep the eyes and ears open, as I present options within the game.

Advancement is slower, somewhere between 1st and 3.5. Stat bonuses for levels are fine, just about everything else is in as well. I just control the characters' power more than let them acquire things with no rationale. Skills and feats then become something akin to magic items - they are rewards for success, not conditional to success. So, they don't simply 'get' feats for going up a level. Levels have to be trained for, so perhaps if their trainer likes them, and they have played well, a feat or 2 will be made available.

It is heavy on roleplay - a village or a small town becomes a base for many sessions, not simply background noise. That's what 3.5 excites in me - there are just SO MANY rewards and opportunities for characters to improve beyond treasure and xp.

So to finish :) - I just knocked off much of the starting power of characters, but am happy with a 6th+ level character doing more than one thing a round, as in line with 3.5 standard.
 

All right I understand where you are coming from but still think it is too much work for too little payoff - but hey it's your game (see rule 0).

I don't think that 1st level 3.5 characters are really that powerful they just have more choices than they used to. They aren't all the cookie cutter fighters they used to be. Shoot spellcasters typically get fewer spells then they used to.

I mean a 1st level character can move and do a standard action that is it. Now, there are a lot of choices with each of those but it boils down to only a move and a standard action really.
As long as you don't get into the grapple rules (gosh they have to be the most complex/convuluted rules I have ever seen - even if they do make sense).
 

Peter said:
In the words of Peter Venkman; "don't cross the streams. That would be bad."

Egon Spengler.

Spengler: "There's something very important I forgot to tell you."
Venkman: "What?"
Spengler: "Don't cross the streams."
Venkman: "Why?"
Spengler: "It would be bad."

-Hyp.
 

Hypersmurf said:
Egon Spengler.

Spengler: "There's something very important I forgot to tell you."
Venkman: "What?"
Spengler: "Don't cross the streams."
Venkman: "Why?"
Spengler: "It would be bad."

-Hyp.

Hyp, you are a king among geeks.
 

Remove ads

Top