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

[Desdichado]

But now we have a rule against playing bloated, overblown, outmoded game systems. If it has more than one core rulebook, forget it. So D&D went right out the window in favor of Savage Worlds, and occasionally d20 Modern.

That seems a bit odd. Allow me a slight divergence from your standard D&D hatred thread for a minute, if I may. d20 Modern uses the same ruleset as D&D. Most of the actions that you'd need to look up in D&D, you'd also need to look up in d20 Modern. The reason D&D appears "bloated" in comparison is because if doesn't have 1) half a book dedicated to nothing but spells, 2) half a book dedicated to nothing but magic items, 3) and entire book dedicated to nothing but monsters, 4) huge sections on things like, say, dungeon wall characteristics and crap like that.

What makes d20 Modern work for you and not D&D? Because it seems to me that it should have most of the same problems.

 

[WizarDru]

I hate to disagree with all these fine ENWorld regulars, but D&D 3.x does encourage rules-lawyering and endless looking-up of obscure modifiers, complex feats and esoteric rule sub-systems (psionics, epic, &c.). Even Gary Gygax and Monte Cook have said as much. A good DM can overcome that complexity, but it will slow down a mediocre DM and/or group of players.

You're perfectly welcome to disagree...such is the nature of intelligent discourse. You may be right that D&D encourages said behavior...but it always has, since it's very inception. As has every RPG I've played for many a moon. 3.X didn't invent rules lawyers or endless debates on specific instances...but it did provide one of the best frameworks to resolve those issues, IMHO. I remember long arguments about how to do something under AD&D over 20 years ago and the unsatisfying results.

While EGG has been clear about his dislike for 3E, he also has gone on record many times with phrases like these: "As for the Good Mr. Cook's other work, as I don't play 3E regularly I don't feel qualified to critique it." He has also stated that he has played 3e no more than a few hours, another reason he doesn't feel it polite to judge it in a professional capacity. EGG was, in this case, referring to Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed, a variant D&D which certainly is no less complex than regular D&D.

In short, you've got the opinion of two very talented game authors who have competing products for D&D pointing out that they don't prefer to use D&D to their own systems. That's not exactly the stuff of compelling arguments, especially when both use variants that are on the same-par, complexity-wise. Neither Lejendary Adventures nor Arcana Evolved strike me as 'simple' systems on the par with the Burning Wheel or the Window, for example. And having played some rules light games, we found ourselves having more rules arguments in those than in 3e, personally.

 

[diaglo]

While EGG has been clear about his dislike for 3E, he also has gone on record many times with phrases like these: "As for the Good Mr. Cook's other work, as I don't play 3E regularly I don't feel qualified to critique it." He has also stated that he has played 3e no more than a few hours, another reason he doesn't feel it polite to judge it in a professional capacity. EGG was, in this case, referring to Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed, a variant D&D which certainly is no less complex than regular D&D.

i like my quote from Monte better.

 

[Templeton580]

D20 Modern is D&D with a few tweaks. Your proof doesn't hold up under scrutiny. And again, this is a matter of:

a)Campaign Control
b)Know Thy Rules

If D&D's not your thing, that's fine...but don't blame the tool for problems that you've said lie with a group.

No...d20 Modern is a simplified version of D&D. Everything "D&D" has been stripped out to create a more-or-less universal system. Your comments don't hold up under scrutiny, because to say "D20 Modern is D&D with a few tweaks," proves you've never actually read it.

"Campaign Control"? I thought gaming groups were supposed to be fun for everyone, and no one's opinion should be neglected. So if I have a group that wants to "get everything right," I should just lay down the law? My game, my books, my house, my rules? I'm taking my books and going home? Anyone who opens a book loses 10,000 x.p.?

"Know Thy Rules." Who are you? Moses? When I have some time to memorize five core books and 78 options, I'll be sure to do that.

I don't consider my posts "proofs," Sparky. They're just opinions.

In my opinion, the tool (i.e. the system) is flawed. Admittedly, the tool is flawed in such a way that group composition can either mitigate or accentuate the flaws (which explains why many people go on their merry way with D&D, loving every second -- more power to 'em). Many posters have said that there's no problem with the tool; it's the DM's fault. I counter that it's not necessarily the DM's fault, it could also be due to the wants of the group, and it could be due to D&D being (imo) a bloated mess.

 

[Jim Hague]

No...d20 Modern is a simplified version of D&D. Everything "D&D" has been stripped out to create a more-or-less universal system. Your comments don't hold up under scrutiny, because to say "D20 Modern is D&D with a few tweaks," proves you've never actually read it.

When you can't create a soldier fresh from Basic Training without having them be 5th or 6th level, I hardly call it simplified. I've got a nice copy of Mongoose's Pocket Modern in my library, thanks, so please don't make a flawed assumption on whether I've read or not read the book. D20 Modern isn't simplified in the least; if anything, it's more complex, thanks to a different series of Feat trees, vehicle rules and modern weaponry.

"Campaign Control"? I thought gaming groups were supposed to be fun for everyone, and no one's opinion should be neglected. So if I have a group that wants to "get everything right," I should just lay down the law? My game, my books, my house, my rules? I'm taking my books and going home? Anyone who opens a book loses 10,000 x.p.?

Get hostile much? Campaign control means that everyone is on the same page. You have x books that you use, and that's it. No bringing in Feats, templates, items or characters without the GM's approval. That's there to keep campaigns consisent and fun for everyone and to minimize having to look up rules.

"Know Thy Rules." Who are you? Moses? When I have some time to memorize five core books and 78 options, I'll be sure to do that.

See above.

I don't consider my posts "proofs," Sparky. They're just opinions.

Please lay off the snark. It's contributing nothing to the thread and doesn't reflect well on you as a poster.

In my opinion, the tool (i.e. the system) is flawed. Admittedly, the tool is flawed in such a way that group composition can either mitigate or accentuate the flaws (which explains why many people go on their merry way with D&D, loving every second -- more power to 'em). Many posters have said that there's no problem with the tool; it's the DM's fault. I counter that it's not necessarily the DM's fault, it could also be due to the wants of the group, and it could be due to D&D being (imo) a bloated mess.

And that's your opinion, which is fine. But an opinion is all it is, and you've done a poor job of supporting your points by resorting to snark and vitriol.

 

[Umbran]

I seems to me that some people are just to lazy to learn the rules and then they complain the rules are to complex.

It isn't always laziness. Not everybody learns the same way - not everybody grasps and remembers detailed rules after a verbal explanation or reading. And some folks simply don't feel it is a priority - they want to get into playing the role, and would prefer to simply tell the GM what they want to do, and have the GM do the job of adjudicating.

There are lots of reasons to not have rules-mastery, and they aren't all so uncomplimentary as what you say above.

 

[Crothian]

"Know Thy Rules." Who are you? Moses? When I have some time to memorize five core books and 78 options, I'll be sure to do that.

What game has five core books?

Options, oddly enough, are optional so if you don't want to use them you don't. Don't blame the game if you are adding in options you don't have time to learn.

 

[Crothian]

It isn't always laziness. Not everybody learns the same way - not everybody grasps and remembers detailed rules after a verbal explanation or reading. And some folks simply don't feel it is a priority - they want to get into playing the role, and would prefer to simply tell the GM what they want to do, and have the GM do the job of adjudicating.

There are lots of reasons to not have rules-mastery, and they aren't all so uncomplimentary as what you say above.

Which is very true. These people then need to find a game and a group that suites these specific needs. There are other reasons then laziness I don't deny that. But that doesn't change the fact that some people are too lazy to learn them.

 

[Templeton580]

That seems a bit odd. Allow me a slight divergence from your standard D&D hatred thread for a minute, if I may. d20 Modern uses the same ruleset as D&D. Most of the actions that you'd need to look up in D&D, you'd also need to look up in d20 Modern. The reason D&D appears "bloated" in comparison is because if doesn't have 1) half a book dedicated to nothing but spells, 2) half a book dedicated to nothing but magic items, 3) and entire book dedicated to nothing but monsters, 4) huge sections on things like, say, dungeon wall characteristics and crap like that.

What makes d20 Modern work for you and not D&D? Because it seems to me that it should have most of the same problems.

Hey, I may sound like a D&D Hatist (or should that be Hatter?), but I'm not. Every time one of these threads comes up (and there are a lot of them, enough to indicate...something), it feels like a bunch of grognards and 3.x fans chorusing, "You just don't know the rules; The DM needs to be less of a wimp; There's absolutely no problem with D&D--I've used it for years!" That sentiment is what I'm reacting to; the willful disregard for recurring evidence that maybe, just maybe, D&D has gotten carried away by the Rules Fairy.

Now, d20 Modern: when I was first told about this book, I resisted it like the plague. "Modern day D&D?! No thanks!" But once I read it, I found it very appealing. The basic classes make a lot more sense to me. Taking out the spells and magic items is a HUGE reduction in complexity. What it comes down to is that it is like D&D, but it is stripped-down and simplified. My only problem with D&D is that it is, to me, the opposite: bloated and complex. So d20 Modern is great; to my mind, it's what D&D 4E should strive for.

 

[Templeton580]

What game has five core books?

Your game of choice.

PHB
PHB II
DMG
DMG II
MM