What did we do before feats, skills, and prestige classes?

[Whisper72]

We used something else. I just can't remember what it was called.....

Hang on.....

It's coming back to me now....

Yes, we used something called "Imagination". I have no idea where we got it from, or where it has gone today, or just exactly how it was used, but it was definitely involved somehow.

Hey.... which book can I buy to get this? You know, I really need an official book from WotC, as I abhor house rules and such....

Is it s feat or a skill?

 

[delericho]

Yes, we used something called "Imagination". I have no idea where we got it from, or where it has gone today, or just exactly how it was used, but it was definitely involved somehow.

And, of course, it was so much better when the Roman Legionnaire and the Mongol horse-archer (of the same level) had the exact same capabilities.

 

[Piratecat]

And, of course, it was so much better when the Roman Legionnaire and the Mongol horse-archer (of the same level) had the exact same capabilities.

No, no, Delericho; you just imagine them being different!

I've loved every version of this game. There are some distinct advantages to the simpler rules set of earlier editions, but you'll have a hard time convincing me that modeling a unique character concept was one of them.

 

[Umbran]

What did we do to make our archtypes, specific novel/movie characters, and new and usual characters before having feats, skills, and prestige classes? Back before we even had kits.

We were flexible. We found that we could make interesting characters the game described well. Concepts that the game didn't do well got shelved. No big deal, no major loss there. On occasion, we wanted to do entirely different genres, so we played Marvel Superheroes or Shadowrun or something.

 

[Whisper72]

And, of course, it was so much better when the Roman Legionnaire and the Mongol horse-archer (of the same level) had the exact same capabilities.

Hrmpfh... it is not how big it is, but how you use it... sorta... I did not need the rules to explain the differences. It had to do with tactics, ideas, motivation, weapons preferred (and not just whatever gives the most plusses), culture etc. I still don't. I disallow prestige classes as I think they are just as horrible as all those kits that were fabricated in 2nd edition, which I also banned.

Although I agree fully with PC that, given the inherent imagination of players and the quality of the DM does not get impaired by a ton of rules, and that therefore, the rules do not _per se_ act as a straitjacket to imagination, I _do_ honestly believe that the plethora of rules, PrC's etc. allow (some) people a 'way out' to play other roles without getting challenged to use their imagination. Thus, although someone who already _is_ imaginative may shine with the additional rules, those people who may need a little 'help' to stimulate their imagination in the 1st edition ruleset, now can sort of 'cop out'. Therefore, looking at the ruleset and the overall gamer population, I would say that the statment that the new rules mean that there is less imagination wihtin the hobby is entirely (following this reasoning and all IMHO naturally) accurate...

 

[The_Gneech]

I can "imagine" that banging my head on a wall is fun. Doesn't make it true.

-The Gneech

 

[Breakdaddy]

I never had a problem with this, but I was always the DM and I allowed for off the wall concepts (within reason). I didnt mind throwing in bonuses to att checks if you were a swashbuckling type trying to swing across the room on the chandelier. I never really let the rules get in the way of a good game. I still dont.

 

[diaglo]

I can "imagine" that banging my head on a wall is fun. Doesn't make it true.

-The Gneech

i disagree. imagine all the people living life in peace. you could say i'm a dreamer. but i'm not the only one. i hope some day you will join me. and ENWurld will ...

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

There have been many discussions about how to make certain characters -- archtypes, specific novel/movie characters, and just new and unusual characters. For instance, there's a thread on this forum right now talking about how to make a Legolas-like character, using two base classes and two prestige classes. Some folks are even suggesting non-core base classes.

I remember when Legolas would have been called a "Fighter 12", or some such. A "war priest" was just a straight cleric, an "abby priest" was just a straight cleric, a "traveling pilgrim" was just a straight cleric.

What did we do to make our archtypes, specific novel/movie characters, and new and usual characters before having feats, skills, and prestige classes? Back before we even had kits.

Quasqueton

Some combos, like swashbucklers or unarmed combatants, sucked. DMs would either have to make up new rules or dredge through 2e kits until they found something cool, similar to the PC's concept and hopefully with a modicum of balance. One of my DMs did manage to come up with a decent "unarmed fighter kit" but I never did see a decent swashbuckler in 2e.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I didn't play Roleplaying Games before skill systems were established. I started with Shadowrun 3rd Edition and later moved to D&D 3.0, with occassional dips into Torg and Das Schwarze Auge(DSA).

I think it might be possible to play a game without such options, but I don't think it would be that much fun. I like rules and using rules. I am a fan of "mastering" a game.
I don't think that I need any less imagination for the current game.

Availability of colors doesn't reduce the imagination of a painter, and some of the most enjoyable reads usually use the complexity and richness of the language they are written in.