Greetings!
Well, indeed, overall I would say that the more thorough rules of 3E have made the game easier to run, smoother, and more consistent. The game requires less "on the fly" rulings now than in previous editions.
That's all well and good.
Really.
However. As some members have alluded to, it's kinda hard to pin down exactly, but it's there none the less. The more rules in many ways act now to *inhibit* creativity and character options. It comes through the very process of defining everything.
Gain some followers for your journey? Sorry, Fighter. You don't have the Leadership Feat.
Your Rogue snarling at the jailer, and making efforts to seem tough and menacing? Sorry. Your character either doesn't have the Intimidate skill, or has only low ranks in it. Fat chance of you intimidating a snot-nosed kid, let alone the rough, beer-swilling jailer with a hard attitude.
Your Ranger character is chasing a brigand through the woods, and the brigand leaps into the river, and swims to the other side to make his escape. Sorry, your Ranger didn't put enough points into his Swim skill. You roll, try and negotiate the rapids, and you suck.
Your Ranger blubbers and thrashes in the water, and drowns.
Your Fighter is the son of a local nobleman, and he goes to a masquerade ball. While there, he attempts to flirt with several ladies-in-waiting, and gets into several discussions with a foreign ambassador from the northern elves, as well as a scholar discussing the empire's history.
Your "noble" Fighter either doesn't have Seduction/Diplomacy, Politics/Nobility, or History skills--or enough ranks to really make an effing difference, because Fighter's skill points suck bad.
In 1E, your character could do all of these things. There were no skills, per se. Below, I have pasted the above snippet examples, and depicted a 1E response, that shows some of the differences from having so many of the details...actually done out, and *specified* rather than purposely left *vague*
Gain some followers for your journey? Sorry, Fighter. You don't have the Leadership Feat.
1E--"Hmmm...right, right...your character does have a pretty good Charisma. Yeah, he should be able to recruit a good number of followers, or persuade some characters to be his henchmen. No problem."
Your Rogue snarling at the jailer, and making efforts to seem tough and menacing? Sorry. Your character either doesn't have the Intimidate skill, or has only low ranks in it. Fat chance of you intimidating a snot-nosed kid, let alone the rough, beer-swilling jailer with a hard attitude.
1E--"Hmmm...yeah, I remember your Rogue character (Thief!!!)--being from the streets, growing up on the docks, and spending lots of time hanging out with the rough crowd. Your character is usually played by you as a tough, ruthless bastard. You say all that to the Jailer? Ok, cool...yeah, the Jailer blanches at your snarling, whispered threats...he lets you through to have a chat with the prisoner..."
Your Ranger character is chasing a brigand through the woods, and the brigand leaps into the river, and swims to the other side to make his escape. Sorry, your Ranger didn't put enough points into his Swim skill. You roll, try and negotiate the rapids, and you suck.
Your Ranger blubbers and thrashes in the water, and drowns.
1E--"Right, right...yeah, I hear you. Your Ranger character has grown up in the Black Woods, and is an expert at wilderness survival, and living off the land, and all that. Of course he's an expert swimmer! Your Ranger leaps into the cold waters, and you catch the fleeing brigand in midstream...roll your attack...the brigand struggles to bring his dagger out to ram it into you desperately..."
Your Fighter is the son of a local nobleman, and he goes to a masquerade ball. While there, he attempts to flirt with several ladies-in-waiting, and gets into several discussions with a foreign ambassador from the northern elves, as well as a scholar discussing the empire's history.
Your "noble" Fighter either doesn't have Seduction/Diplomacy, Politics/Nobility, or History skills--or enough ranks to really make an effing difference, because Fighter's skill points suck bad.
1E--"Oh yes...the ladies...you have a 15 Charisma...yeah, they giggle, and respond well to you...what do you ask them again? You should be able to get at least some good information about the rival noble from them..."
"True...your Fighter character is well-versed in the politics of the Northern Elves. Your father took you on several trips there when you were a teenager. Yes, you impress the ambassador with your skill, and your knowledge of his homeland, and the political difficulties he faces with the new trade agreement."
"Hmmm...quite right. Yes, your Fighter character was trained at the university...he's very knowledgable about the history of the empire...what do you say to the scholar? yeah, you should do pretty well, all things considered."
As can be seen, all of the situations in 1E did not require a dice roll, or even a rule. Your character largely just *did it*--with perhaps an occasional roll for something especially challenging or demanding. In 3E, if something isn't very easy--DC 10--a low-level character, especially fighters, for example...have a high chance of absolute failure.
In 1E, there was more room, *creatively* wise, that you could improvise such, without reference to a required, specified skill/feat/ability/roll, and just *do* or have a good chance anyways of doing, simply by background, roleplaying skill, or assumed knowledge. In 3E, of course you can handwave such, or add some kind of bonus to justify it, but there's a certain mechanicalness involved, and a higher basis for failure of reasonably challenging topics for beginning characters, or even higher level characters, if they don't have the required skills even then, by the mechanical rules subsets, to necessarily accomplish the same things that a character was assumed to be able to do or know in a 1E game, for example.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
