Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MerakSpielman" data-source="post: 1814066" data-attributes="member: 7464">Oh, I am being nice. &nbsp;Appologies. I meant 1st ed., not 2nd.&nbsp;There's nothing wrong with 1st edition. But there's nothing wrong with 3rd edition either. The purpose of 3rd edition was to impliment the d20 system. I'm sure you know what that means, but I'll summarize anyway. To accomplish an action, you roll a d20 and add modifiers. You try to beat a set DC. If you beat the DC, your action succeeds. &nbsp;That is the mechanic virtually all the rules of 3.x are based off of. The rest of the system can be changed to suit whatever flavor you like - low powered, high powered, whatever.&nbsp;For simplicity there has to be some mechanism to determine who, sitting at the table, gets to go next. You can't all go at once, just for real-world logistics purposes. So the rules have you do what you do everywhere else - roll a d20 with modifiers. &nbsp;For some reason you seem to think that rolling d20s and adding modifiers turns D&amp;D from &quot;simplicity and ease&quot; to &quot;super-hero inspired flashy action.&quot;&nbsp;No offense intended, but I just don't see it. I see you, for some reason, wanting to make complicated and difficult-to-follow rules to replace the &quot;roll d20 add modifiers&quot; concept. I see you wanting to do this because you don't find the new, simpler rules to accurately reflect what you invision happening in a combat.&nbsp;I'm trying to warn you that mixing the systems into an unrecognizable, complicated mish-mash might have unintented side effects. &nbsp;I'm trying to explain to you that I see no reason why you can't play any game you like, with any flavor, with any system you like. Having a gritty, struggle-to-survive game is quite possible in 3.x without changing a single rule. Having a super-hero inspired munchkinfest is possible in 1st ed. without changing a single rule.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MerakSpielman, post: 1814066, member: 7464"] Oh, I [i]am[/i] being nice. Appologies. I meant 1st ed., not 2nd. There's nothing wrong with 1st edition. But there's nothing wrong with 3rd edition either. The purpose of 3rd edition was to impliment the d20 system. I'm sure you know what that means, but I'll summarize anyway. To accomplish an action, you roll a d20 and add modifiers. You try to beat a set DC. If you beat the DC, your action succeeds. That is the mechanic virtually all the rules of 3.x are based off of. The rest of the system can be changed to suit whatever flavor you like - low powered, high powered, whatever. For simplicity there has to be some mechanism to determine who, sitting at the table, gets to go next. You can't all go at once, just for real-world logistics purposes. So the rules have you do what you do everywhere else - roll a d20 with modifiers. For some reason you seem to think that rolling d20s and adding modifiers turns D&D from "simplicity and ease" to "super-hero inspired flashy action." No offense intended, but I just don't see it. I see you, for some reason, wanting to make complicated and difficult-to-follow rules to replace the "roll d20 add modifiers" concept. I see you wanting to do this because you don't find the new, simpler rules to accurately reflect what you invision happening in a combat. I'm trying to warn you that mixing the systems into an unrecognizable, complicated mish-mash might have unintented side effects. I'm trying to explain to you that I see no reason why you can't play any game you like, with any flavor, with any system you like. Having a gritty, struggle-to-survive game is quite possible in 3.x without changing a single rule. Having a super-hero inspired munchkinfest is possible in 1st ed. without changing a single rule. [/QUOTE]

Verification