Third Edition Culture- Is is sustainable?

[Belen]

So, basically, uou advocate eliminating Bless, Prayer, most bardic singing abilities, Enlarge Person, Reduce Person, and virtually every other spell that is not a direct damage spell, and every feat that only works "some of the time" (like Point Blank Shot, which only works within 30 feet).

That will make for a very different game. One that diverges greatly from any other version that has ever been printed. In point of fact, I'm not sure you could call it D&D any more.

Nope, just change them to fit within a simpler framework. Point Blank shot would just grant a flat +1 att/dmg to ranged weapons.

Spells are somewhat trickier. (Note: That is said remove or modify things that provide a temporary bonus for a short period of time). 10 min/lvl is good. Rd/lvl would be bad.

The main issue with 3e IMO is that too many bonus' stack. It then becomes confusing and stops the game while everyone figures out what mods they have, whether they stack, what condition they apply too.

It's nightmare-like.

 

[Psion]

Well put. Its the issue when discussing game balance.

Well, I consider it one half of the issue, namely the PC vs. PC half.

The other half is the PC vs. DM half, i.e., the ability of the DM to challenge the players without going to extremes of effort or credibility, or risking harm to the flow of the game (e.g., killing all but one character in order to challenge that one character.)

 

[fredramsey]

The Dream is Always the Same...

RING-RING

WOTC: "Hello, Wizards of the Coast, how can I help you?"

Caller: "Yeah, I don't like 3rd Edition D&D."

WOTC: "Sorry to hear that. What don't you like about it?"

Caller: "I think it's too complicated, and it bugs me that it's so popular."

WOTC: "I see. Well, we stress in our books that you can change things. Why don't you change what you don't like?"

Caller: "It's too complicated. And I don't want anyone else to play it either."

WOTC: "Ok... Why did you call?"

Caller: "I want you to stop making 3rd Edition, and recall all the books that are out there."

WOTC: "Oh, I see. Let me talk to the boys for a moment."

WOTC: "Ok, you're right. We're going to stop production, demand that everyone return their books (for a full refund, of course). We'll be mailing everyone a copy of the Red Box Basic D&D set for free, and we've decided to deliver pizzas for a living. We didn't realize we were offending you. Please forgive us."

Caller: Bwahahaha!

 

[GlassJaw]

This thread has gone a few different ways but I just wanted to post a couple more comments.

I really like the d20/3ed system. As others have said, it's what brought me back to D&D. I love the fact that the rules make sense and don't really require any house rules. You can play right out of the book. Some call it too wargame-ish but I like the fact that there is no grey in the rules.

After playing it since it came out, however, there are 2 main areas that I don't like:

1. Too much crunch. This was one of the problems with 2ed as well. Everything now is more, more, more: more PrC's, more feats, more spells, etc. I believe 3ed as it stands now is on overload. I know the simple answer is "don't use what you don't like" but the problem is with all the influx of material, it's very difficult to find a group where everyone is on the same page. If someone has a new shiny book, they want to use it. If you want to run a game that's more streamlined, you run the risk of making the players unhappy.

2. High-level play. High-level play in a "standard" 3ed campaign is brutal. After 12th level so, the system becomes a dinosaur. The system just has too many options: spells, magic items, special abilties, etc. You can spend a whole session just planning and buffing up for a battle. Then once you start the battle, that takes a whole session too! Again, some people will debate this but I've been in a slew of groups since 3ed came out and I've never seen this probelm remedied. As someone else mentioned, it's also a nightmare for a DM to run party vs party battles too. You always end up forgetting something along the way.

 

[Akrasia]

...
But I would put in another way. It's not a capability issue. It's a preference issue.

Most gamers have the capability to deal with the rigors that 3e requires. Some just don't wish to. My point is that those who point to complexity of 3e as a failing don't have an objective point, as many pretend. It's a preference...

I agree with this up to a point. It is certainly true that, as a player, 3e is not too bad in terms of complexity. It really is just a matter of preference. (I quite like playing in 3E.)

However, while it is to some extent a matter of preference from the DM's perspective as well, it really does take a lot of time for most DMs to prep for 3.x games. (At least most DMs I know -- and I've noticed this complaint on various boards as well.)

Not having enough time to do what is necessary in order to make a 3.x game run smoothly is a real problem for many DMs of 'advanced age'.

E.g. even if I really liked all the 'crunch' in 3.x, I cannot imagine having enough time to do the necessary prep for a campaign above, say, level 11 or so. This is a brute fact: job takes up x number of hours, relationship takes up y number of hours, family z, and so forth. Only so many hours are avaiable for this hobby.

Is this an 'objective' problem with 3.x D&D? It is insofar as many mature DMs simply do not have enough time to prep adequately for their sessions. Granted, there are 'short cuts' -- e.g. prepacked modules, and so forth. But for some DMs (myself included) campaign design is 50 percent of the fun.

IME it is a real challenge to find decent DMs in my age group (30+) for 3E. And this is probably the main reason why I'm switching to a 'rules lite' system (viz. shorter prep times).

Whether this is a problem for "3E culture" in general -- I have no idea!

 

[Belen]

WOTC: "Ok, you're right. We're going to stop production, demand that everyone return their books (for a full refund, of course). We'll be mailing everyone a copy of the Red Box Basic D&D set for free, and we've decided to deliver pizzas for a living. We didn't realize we were offending you. Please forgive us."

I have yet to see anyone in this thread suggest the dissolution of 3e, rant about the evils of 3e or insult those who play 3e. The only comments I have seen are people posting what they perceive as problems in the edition that they have had while running or playing 3e.

I am not sure why you seem to be going out of your way to belittle people in this thread, who I feel, have been largely good natured and positive about the overall game.

Maybe this is not the intent, but that is exactly how it is coming across.

 

[Retro-Rocket]

Yes, it allows for more tactical options, but makes the combat far more dry and abstract. It really cuts down on cinematic visuals. And it seriously increases metagaming.

The combats that I have run or played in have been fun and interesting with the tactical options that 3e gives me. And as for metagaming, it's been around for a long long time.

Personally, I can go either way. But 2-3 combats literally take about 2-3 hours depending on the level of the party.

One combat per hour sounds damn good to me. What where you used to?

 

[Scribble]

I like 3e. It's a great game. But after I've been playing it for a while I realized that for me, I think a lot of the problem lies within the feats system. Problem isn't really the perfect word because I love the feat system, but at the same time I hate it. Let me explain.

When I first saw the feat system I loved it. A way to constantly "upgrade" characters and creatures that was fair, and probably wouldn't wreck my game. Finally a way to combat the rules lawyers whom always seemed to take offense when I would give certain opponents new abilities, even though I never did it to hurt them more, but to make the NPC seem more alive, or more in tune with what my minds eye saw... Then as I began to use the feats something bugged me about them...

I realised what it was a while back. I love coming up with character concepts and gaming, but for some reason I've never been a fan of character creation. Now, when I created an NPC or the BBEG it seemed like I was basing my creations off of what I could find in a feat. Since I don't so much like character creation, my NPCs began to suffer because I would generally use a few feats I knew off hand rather then poor through countless books looking for the perfect feat.

So what I've determined is that I'm probably going to go back to my old style. Instead of feats I'm just going to give enemies powers if I envision them that way. Or invent my own feats when needed. Hopefully that will solve some of my issues

 

[Jeff Wilder]

The comments regarding the complexity of stacking ongoing effects have me a little perplexed.

In my group, we use a megamat. If someone casts bless, at least one person notes the effects on the margin of the megamat. If someone later casts haste, same thing. If a specific character gets a bull's strength, that character marks the effects on the margin of the megamat. If the party wizard casts slow on my bad guys, I mark the effect on the megamat.

This isn't calculus. This is addition, generally speaking of single-digit integers. It shouldn't take someone bright enough to play D&D more than a half of a second to look down, note modifiers, and apply them to his or her character.

That said, there is one player in my group who slows things down consistently on her turn, precisely due to stacking effects. But she is both severely math-phobic and lazy. She also has this thing about pretending to be helpless that annoys the hell out of me.

My point is: just have a system, even if it's as simple as ours, and the problem goes away.

Now there is the problem of players who are very slow to make up their minds, but that's a different issue. There's one player like that in our group, but people tolerate it because his tactical abilities have saved the entire party on more than one occasion. I admit that I tend toward slowness, too, because I tend toward developing very mechanically complex characters.

(For example, my last character was a barbarian with Power Attack, Improved Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Karmic Strike and so on and so on. Calculating the interactions of that many potential bonuses and penalties does get slow, primarily because they can only be worked out in advance to a limited extent. And my current character is a necro-theurge, with all of the spell choices involved.)

For groups that have this problem, a strict time-limit should solve it quickly and easily. A 30-second sand timer costs, what, a buck?

 

[fredramsey]

I was having a bit of fun exaggerating what I perceive as some of the trollish posts on this thread and other recent threads that have been covering the same subject.

I agree the majority of people on the boards are "discussing" their differences, but there are some who are attempting to paint their preferences as fact.

I apologize if you or anyone else found my post offensive. It was just a little levity injected to hold up a mirror to the emotions I was perceiving.

I have yet to see anyone in this thread suggest the dissolution of 3e, rant about the evils of 3e or insult those who play 3e. The only comments I have seen are people posting what they perceive as problems in the edition that they have had while running or playing 3e.

I am not sure why you seem to be going out of your way to belittle people in this thread, who I feel, have been largely good natured and positive about the overall game.

Maybe this is not the intent, but that is exactly how it is coming across.