Tell me that D&D 3.0/3.5 isn't really like this

[Crothian]

I'd be interested to see if WotC's Basic Set and/or 'Dummies book' do as well as the old Basic Set did.

I doubt very much that those two products together come close to matching the old Basic Set's 1-million/year figure.

Of course they won't, nothing is selling like it used to.

 

[Impeesa]

LOL, I love the sheer number of mistakes in that example!

First up: the move described only provokes one attack of opportunity, per the Attacks of Opportunity examples in the SWRCR. Second, even with Combat Reflexes, Obi-Wan could only make one attack of opportunity on a single opponent in the round. Third, although we don't know Anakin's Tumble check modifier, I would not be remotely surprised if it weren't high enough that he wouldn't even have to roll - the DC is only 15, after all. (He's not moving through Obi-Wan's space, he's moving a good distance over it.)

Really, what they should have said is something along the lines of: George Lucas isn't bound by the d20 rules, or something similar. In any event, the removal of multiple limbs, as opposed to just one, isn't much of a stretch.

Edit: So you know what I'm talking about: The example.

Obi-wan: Readied action do 'disarm' the next enraged former student to violate his airspace.

The rules cover everything, provided your Applied Rules Knowledge is high enough.

--Impeesa--

 

[Barak]

1-I'm my game, I DM.

2-While I'm sure I know the rules less well than many posters on here, I know them better than my players.

3-They know that as a fact.

4-They also know I'm not out to "screw" them

5-When a rule thing comes up, I give the player about 2 minutes to find the rule, if -I- don't know it, or disagree with me (despite #3). If they don't, or if they do and -I don't believe them, I look it up.

6-We lost a max of 4 minutes there. If nothing is found, I rule on it. That's it.

5 minute for an obscure rule is about as good as any other system out there, and probably more fair. If you think that's untrue, prove it.

 

[Beale Knight]

So Vindicator, if you've managed to make it through 3 pages of discussion, you can hopefully see that D&D can be like that, but it doesn't HAVE to be like that. Like so many things, the experience you get out of it depends a lot on how it's used.

Beyond that, it never, ever, spurs any sort of argument at all.

 

[Arnwyn]

It's not really like that, is it? Because this guy's experience is the same as my own. I've only played 3.0/3.5 with one group of people these past few years, and honestly, that's what our sessions are like too. I think I need either a new group or a new game.

But the problem above is with the group, right? Not the system, right?

No system can make a group constantly look up rules and slow down the game... but, regardless what some people try to say, a system can certainly encourage such behavior.

But, encouragement or otherwise, it comes down to the players and DM to be so "encouraged". If you have players that absolutely insist on 100% consistency and 100% precedent 100% of the time, you'll likely be in trouble with 3.xe when a rare rule is applicable or you need to make up rules to cover odd situations - lots slowdown will be inevitable in such a heavily defined system with many rules combined with feats (that are often designed to "break" or provide exceptions to the main rules).

I'm willing to hazard a guess and say it's a player problem (and only rarely a DM or system problem).

 

[Raduin711]

I think there is a mindset in D&D that there is a rule for everything... everything seems to have to fit in some category, especially move/standard/full/free/swift/ actions, and AOO (provokes/doesn't/might). The rules set for D&D is a little tedious, which promotes the atmosphere of "look it up, the answer must be in there" which naturally leads to "how do we interpret what we have found?"

Yes, Rule 0 exists, but priority 1 for most dm's is to be fair, and rules make it easier to do that, so DM's will naturally tend to lean toward finding an in-book ruling. And if that takes some interpretation, so be it... and that precludes rule 0, even if the books breifly reccommend for the DM to make a temporary decision just to keep the game moving. It's just the nature of the beast.

I don't think it makes a DM "crappy" to want to be fair and get trapped by the extremely specific rules set... I think it just means that he has one area of the game to work on.

 

[Raduin711]

I'm willing to hazard a guess and say it's a player problem (and only rarely a DM or system problem).

In my experience, I've seen a lot of the slowdown occur because a player does something not expressly detailed in the rules, but could very easily conceiveably happen in real life. In this case it's either on the DM to exercise rule 0, or the rules set lacking the broader tools.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Exactly. It's an incompetent craftsman that blames his tools.

Is it really? Here's a hammer, go saw those 4x4s in half with it.

 

[delericho]

Obi-wan: Readied action do 'disarm' the next enraged former student to violate his airspace.

Sure, but that's not the example being discussed. The question asked in the article is how Obi-wan removes three limbs with what appears to be one attack, when the RAW state (apparently) that you can only take one per attack. The answer comments that in addition to getting his readied action, Obi-wan also made two attacks of opportunity, one for each leg, and that the GM just narrated it as a single swipe of the blade. Shame that the rules disagree with that interpretation.

Besides, the rules don't cover everything, no matter how hard the game tries. There's just too wide a variation of possible circumstances and actions.

Anyway, I'm done with my thread-jacking here. Expect me to return to the topic at hand... soon...

 

[delericho]

I don't agree that d20/D&D particularly encourages the sorts of lengthy rules-checking described in the example. Even when my group was first learning the system, we never got into anything like that. Bluntly, if the group is spending that much time looking for a specific rule, then they need to learn the rules better. Moreover, the DM needs to get a better grip on pacing: if things are taking too long, make a ruling and move on.

I do wonder, though, how many potential new players are put off by the sheer density of the rules. With three large core rulebooks, all filled with small text, that's a lot of reading and comprehension. And although the Basic Set goes some way to allieviating the difficulties, there isn't any product bridging the gap between the Basic rules and the 'full' rules. (Then again, the best way to introduce new players has to be by having existing players ease them in. Again, though, I wonder how many groups make that setting-in easy for new players, and how many bombard them with too much information and too many supplements early on?)