Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="catsclaw227" data-source="post: 4876541" data-attributes="member: 14197">Since one of the key design goals of 3.x was to allow for system mastery, it appears that the more modern editions of D&D might be better suited to your preferred style of play.Personally, I kind of like it in the middle.   I am running 4e and I like the little bit of leeway that a DM gets regarding NPCs and Monsters and making decisions because not every little thing is not accounted for in the mechanics.  I did prefer 3.x over AD&D after a while, because as I got older, I didn't like the wonkyness (as coined by an old-school style gamer) in the mechanics of AD&D as much as I did when I was younger.Different strokes, as they say.But sorta back on topic... We once played a game in the late 80's that was rooted in D&D, but we didn't have formal rules for much of anything except the vague references to AD&D PHB, DMG and MM.  We had PCs with generic descriptors for abilities.  So, for example, my PC was average strength, pretty smart, exceptional dexterity, not very charismatic, etc...We weren't even sure what our class and race was, because we were asked to describe our "profession", and the DM sorta went with the flow. The campaign lasted a long time, though the DM was exceptional and we also slowly migrated tighter to the AD&D rules as time went on and we got to know our PCs better.We RPed our development almost entirely with descriptors until we were about 5th level and then we knew what class we were.  We grew into the class.It was interesting, but I am not sure if I would want to do that again.</blockquote>

Verification