Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 5019500" data-attributes="member: 59082">In a recent binge phase in which I've been going back and purchasing old books I used to own, I just got a copy of the 2E DMG in the mail a few days ago, the earlier one with the awful blue-and-black theme (shivers in horror). While browsing through it I was struck by how familiar it all seemed even though I hadn't looked at this book for ten or more years (I think I sold my 2E books when 3E came out, or even before). Then I came to page 22, or rather the gloriousness that is page 22 and 23: Character class creation guidelines. And I felt a sense of loss, realizing that something is missing with later editions of D&D.Don't get me wrong: I liked 3E a helluva lot more than 2E; and I like 4E more than 3E. I am seemingly one of the few, or at least within the minority, of serious fans that believe that D&D has gotten better with each edition, that AD&D was better than OD&D, that 3E was better than 2E, and that 4E is the best edition so far. Yes, it is "best for me" but I also think it is the best in terms of RPGs as an aesthetic form. So shoot me. But something has been lost, and it could be called encouraged customization. Sure, there are options for customization in 4E, and DM's Fiat applies no matter what edition that you play--and 4E certainly encourages it. But there are no character class creation rules, no race creation rules, no options in Character Builder for porting in custom-made classes or races or feats.This bothers me. To me this is where D&D is veering dangerously close to video games. One of the main differences between computer games and RPGs is that the former are programmed; they are finite--you can only go where a pre-determined program allows you to go. 1s and 0s. But with RPGs there is no limit, or rather the limit is the imagination of the people playing it. And that, my friends, makes all the difference in the world. Certainly in 4E there is still no limit to where the imagination can go. I am one who believes that "fluff" trumps "crunch." I also think that the supposed lack of non-combat oriented rules actually frees non-combat situations to be what they should be: role-playing, not roll-playing (not counting skill challenges, of course <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" />). But the rules of 4E, and the platform fo D&D Insider, leave little to no opening for customization. Sure, I can make whatever races or classes that I want. But why not provide guidelines for them? Why not give me pointers on how to make a race that is balanced with the others? A class that isn't too powerful or too weak? Customizing monsters -- great. Encounter design -- very helpful. 4E is terrific at making a DM's job easier with the nitty gritty stuff. But there is still little to no guidance on how to get below the surface of the rules, on how to not only build structures with blocks but how to make building blocks, with interesting and unique shapes.In other words, what is lackingi s a DM's toolkit--not only for adventure and campaign design, but for game design. In many ways 2E is the least "sexy" of the editions: it doesn't have the classic simplicity of OD&D; it doesn't have the Gygaxian madness of 1E; it doesn't have the depth and quality of supplementation that 3E has; and it doesn't have the sleek gameyness of 4E. It does have tons of great and often innovative (at the time) settings, though, and it does have page 22 and 23 of the DMG.</blockquote>

Verification