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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="D+1" data-source="post: 1846203" data-attributes="member: 13654">IME the problem of slowness really isn't a system problem though - it's a player problem.  Even if your players AREN'T slowpokes unable to decide upon actions quickly and enthusiastically 3E is simply not other editions and in some ways it cannot be compared to them because of it.  Slowness of playing out combats is an example.In the good(bad?) ol' days combat was fast, plentiful, and LIFELESS.  It was, as one poster noted, largely a matter of two sides lining up and beating on each other thorugh a rapid series of die rolls.  There were virtually NO tactical options built into the rules.  That isn't to say they couldn't be handled, only that the rules themselves largely ignored tactics of any kind other than that prompted by the basic mathematics of dice results.  Movement in previous editions was, "I run from A to B," and you either succeeded or the DM determined that you were prevented at some point.  Movement now involves noting a more precise route to get from A to B and the DM determines what additional consequences (AoO) are involved rather than just yes/no it's allowed.  Distances of movement are also a fraction of what they were before which in a meta-game sense physically forces more interaction on a tactical level.Combat before was, "roll dice to hit, roll dice for damage, lather, rinse, repeat."  Combat now involves a wide selection of feats and abilities that often apply at different times and in varying ways requiring tactical consideration of how to maximize the value of those abilities.In short 3E combat is DIFFERENT than it used to be because the game has fundamentally restructured how it works.But then the games pacing of multiple battles has also changed.  Unlike earlier editions which were marked more by the sheer quantity of opponents and battles, 3E instead features fewer battles, with VASTLY greater consequences upon the advancement of characters, all against FAR fewer opponents, but with much more complex tactics and abilities of participants.  Now whether you LIKE that, dislike it or downright HATE it, it is the 3E paradigm.  Because that paradigm is so divergent from previous edtions you just can't compare pre- and post-3e and declare one to be manifestly superior in that aspect of the game - you can only express a preference.There are two primary means of reducing/eliminating (2).The first is to SIMPLIFY the game that you're playing.  If you run straight-up core-rules 3E, stop trying to add new options with every supplement that hits the shelves(and stop letting PLAYERS bring in new supplements every week as if they were video game powerups) I'd just about guarantee an easier to handle DM prep situation.  The second is to avoid the higher levels of the game.  You'll get no argument from me that levels in the teens and up are FAR more complex in 3E to prep and to PLAY.  Characters and NPC's end up with SO many options they become overwhelming.  But the trick is that nobody every said you HAD to go there.  My current campaign features slower-than-normal advancement rates for PC's and has no anticipated NPC that will be much higher than 10th - and the 10th+ level types will effectively already be world-renowned.  Once the PC's reach that level (if ever) I anticipate most of them moving from active adventuring.  The campaign itself will not be designed to move much further for such PC's.Stop playing with gearheads then, or stop trying to accomodate them and kill the fun of the game for yourself.  Just because the system CAN be a tweak-fest doesn't mean is has to be or even SHOULD be.One of the other things about 3E is that by having more rules integrated into its structure I've noticed so many gamers - most notably the old-timers - focusing on the rules and forgetting that it was their imaginations that used to fire their interest in the game itself.  The requirement of previous versions to constantly invent new rules and try to fix the system as a whole, the need to simply envision or describe the tactical aspects of combat that are now built in, these things fostered creativity.  Too many people now seem to mistakenly think that it's rulemongering that suffices for creativity, when the new rules were really intended to channel that creativity to ROLEplaying, not ROLLplaying</blockquote>

Verification