Third Edition Culture- Is is sustainable?

[Scribble]

Amen. 3rd Editon is not the best selling RPG because WOTC is going to anyone's house and twisting their arm to play it.

This get's back to what I think the focus of the topic was. Truth be told I'm not sure 3e being the best seller isn't at this point mainly due to it's relative newness... Look at Vampire's run when it came out for instance. For a time it was the game to play. I think d20/3e has had a good run because it was an industry shaker what with the open game/d20 thing. Wizards was good at industry shaking. They did it twice, magic and d20. Will they do it again? Something tells me no, because Hasbro having investors will be less inclined to take a chance on things... So we're just waiting for the next companies big new thing.

Now here's what I've noticed regarding the "the rules are too complex" vrs "No they're not" issue.

To me, it's not so much that the rules are complex, it's more the "it's in there" factor. In this edition, there are rules seemingly for just about ANYTHING you can think of... If you look at each skill you can see it. Each one is broken down into about a zillion different things you can do with them and the exact DC you need to do it.

This creates an idea that if you can't find it, you must have just missed it because there's rules for almost everything else, why wouldn't THAT be in there... So whereas in older editions I know at least in my case, if I didn't find the rule at first glance I'd assume it wasn't in there and just ad hock it. In the newer edition I'm more likely to check again because I'm assuming it IS in there. And with the pretty much ABYSMAL index of 3e, it tends to add time to my game.

Now sure you can adhock any rule in the new edition just as easily as in the older editions, but here's an example: Say you're playing a game and the DM says oh man, I can't remember the to hit rule... Well, just roll a d20 and if you get over say a 10 you hit him... You'd be upset right? Well others will be upset about just about any rule that is actualy in there that you adhock.

I guess that's why they say the devil is in the details right?

 

[Rasyr]

Narfellus, you agreed with Turjan that separating races from classes, and having magic as a skill are good ideas. Other have mentioned that they would like BAB to be a skill, and still other have asked for more things. Over in the Pet Peeves thread, folks have mentioned a lot of other things as well.

You call it the "logical progression of the system". There is already a game out there actually HAS almost everything that I have seen folks talking about in this (and the Pet Peeves) thread. If that is the "logical progression", then the future is already here, it just doesn't use a twenty-sided die or carry the d20 logo (although there is a free pdf giving guidelines on how to play this game using a d20).

 

[Psion]

Narfellus, you agreed with Turjan that separating races from classes, and having magic as a skill are good ideas. Other have mentioned that they would like BAB to be a skill, and still other have asked for more things. Over in the Pet Peeves thread, folks have mentioned a lot of other things as well.

You call it the "logical progression of the system". There is already a game out there actually HAS almost everything that I have seen folks talking about in this (and the Pet Peeves) thread.

Oh? (Askance stare). I know you want to promote your baby, but I think you are losing sight of the fact that these are still individual preferences. It might be fair to say that there are some people would find aspects of your game appealing, but don't go off thinking that because lots of people share things they dislike that the all hold a substantial portion of them.

For example, I am the one who brought up BAB as a skill. But you can pry spell slots out of my cold dead hands.

As I said upthread, what game is "right for you" is a balancing act between which attributes of a game you like versus those attributes you can put up with.

 

[Sebastian Francis]

I find someone pining for days gone gone by calling those who are following the current norm "die hards" a rather curious choice of terms to say the least.

Oh, come on now. Don't be such a big grump. First of all, I am not "pining for days gone by." I love and enjoy all versions of D&D, although with each version I have issues, as do we all. Second, I was not calling *all* 3rd edition fans "die hards." Rather, I was stating that *even those 3rd edition fans who ARE die hards* tend to respect the Rules Cyclopedia.

 

[Sebastian Francis]

Lastly, i think a lot of what people like about old Dnd was nostalgia. It was a "secret" game, misunderstood by adults and teachers. Complex rules that only the smartest (and usually dorkiest) kids could digest and implement. Nowadays, good lord, everyone and his brother knows about DnD. Movies, books, tshirts, mugs, videogames, it's mainstream, it's hip and cool to play Dnd, and the mystery that we once enjoyed has been shared world wide, almost like giving away a treasured toy.

Not quite. First of all, D&D was *far* more mainstream in the early 80's than it is today. There were D&D action figures at Toys R Us, and even a D&D Saturday morning cartoon, for goodness sake. Second, D&D has *never* been hip and cool, and probably never will.

Perhaps you're thinking of X Box?

 

[Psion]

Oh, come on now. Don't be such a big grump.

Grump? I didn't think I was being a grump towards you, at least. Only one instance above was I feeling grumpy, and in that case, I was very careful to choose my words.

So if you are feeling assailed, don't.

 

[Desdichado]

This does not necessarily have to be. Who knows, maybe the next version of D&D will have races divided from cultures, magic as a skill and classes replaced bay a point-buy-system. If the now existing classes are still offered as some kind of prebuilt templates that illustrate the results of the point-buy, everybody should be fine.

Don't hold your breath. WotC believes some of those key design elements (classes and levels, in particular, which would negate a point-buy evolution) are keys to the success of D&D versus other systems. It may seem like a logical progression to you, but in that case, you're better off progressing (logically, no doubt) to another system.

 

[Turjan]

Narfellus, you agreed with Turjan that separating races from classes, and having magic as a skill are good ideas. Other have mentioned that they would like BAB to be a skill, and still other have asked for more things. Over in the Pet Peeves thread, folks have mentioned a lot of other things as well.

Well, except that my preferences have a different order . I have some pet peeves with D&D's magic system, although I don't have anything against spell slots. I like Vancian magic . It's just that the magic system has to be made more scalable to allow proper multiclassing.

You call it the "logical progression of the system". There is already a game out there actually HAS almost everything that I have seen folks talking about in this (and the Pet Peeves) thread. If that is the "logical progression", then the future is already here, it just doesn't use a twenty-sided die or carry the d20 logo (although there is a free pdf giving guidelines on how to play this game using a d20).

Well, I suppose we can keep our d20's. Arcana Unearthed addresses most of my pet peeves with D&D. The Artificer's Handbook addresses another one .

 

[Henry]

Rasyr, not to disparage HARP certainly, but I did have three die-hard 3E fans who really did not care much for the HARP demo they played at a Gameday recently. They couldn't put their finger on it directly, but there was something about the game rules they did not enjoy - they enjoyed the GM immensely who ran it, but said their experience was more like a good GM making the most out of a not-as-good game system.

Fortunately, one of the players won a copy of the game system, so I might borrow it from him and see what I make of it, and if I can, I might see if I can get one of the players who played it to comment on this thread and see if he can put his finger on what didn't set right with him about the rules he saw. It's still a case of different stroke for different folks, but some people I suspect just don't mind the rules that cover most conditions, and don't feel confortable with more free-form systems. (Ironically, these three are also three of the strongest supporters of Feng Shui you'll ever see. )

 

[Zelda Themelin]

This does not necessarily have to be. Who knows, maybe the next version of D&D will have races divided from cultures, magic as a skill and classes replaced bay a point-buy-system. If the now existing classes are still offered as some kind of prebuilt templates that illustrate the results of the point-buy, everybody should be fine.

Oh, sound awfully lot like a GURPS to me.

OK, that said, it's not really that hard to make rule to allow changing class abilities to feats or vice versa. Actually crafting new base classses is more game-balance friendly (for those who prefer it) than constant prestige classing to get something one wants. Want to have fighter who has always used only light armors? Remove Medium and Heavy armor feats and give dodge and mobility as trade off. And so on. I'd stick with core rules while doing this however.

Magic system is not easy to re-place. Honestly, most alternative magic systems get even more complicated, and not that much better IMO. I like Unearthed Arcana's take on that however, mainly because it doesn't make me have to rework with all my spells.

Generally, I like D&D just fine. I was really burned out with character making before that. I don't mean npc/baddie stats so much, as I mean making player characters.

From those systems I do have played (and they are many), D&D has many qualities that make it better for me, and I have no problem houseruling it's few faults. Some are a bit more complicated to house-rule, though.

Most of my problems with D&D as system start when CR/level hits 12+, and I like high level game, both as Dm and player. Or rather, I like games to start form low levels and get all the way to epic levels. Then the houseruling really starts. Luckily it's mostly about CR:s and problems prestige classing creates. Not enough options for base classes cretes need for prestige classes for those players who woudn't otherwise multiclass.

So, D&D like most systems, has it's faults. Still, it's my favourite