What ever happened to just "playing" the game and telling a great story?

[Rel]

This post seems to be mistaking playstyle for edition, which is a lamentably common tendency on these boards. Having a bunch of min-maxers as fellow players and running through a gigantic dungeon meat grinder is something that's at least as common in older editions as in new ones. If anything, it would have been more common in older editions because of legacy wargaming tendencies and modules that were written before the touchy-feely characterization and narrative emphasis of 2e.

Mmmhmm.

 

[Jack Daniel]

Precisely why I prefer 2e to 1e or 3e. Touchy-feely narrative and characterization.

That said, since AD&D (and its d20 System descendants) were designed to be comprehensive, balanced, and largely tinker-proof, I much prefer O/CD&D. You have more license to house-rule it up. Rules Cyclopedia rules + 2e flavor = IMHO best version of D&D possible. Of course, YMMV.

 

[barsoomcore]

3.5 ED took that houseruled class and turned it into a Blackguard.

My point (that I evidently failed to make) is that the blackguard (or rather, the anti-paladin) did NOT originate in 3.5 OR 3rd Edition, so your argument that 3.5 somehow impacted your game in this manner is not very convincing.

 

[diaglo]

If anything, it would have been more common in older editions because of legacy wargaming tendencies and modules that were written before the touchy-feely characterization and narrative emphasis of 2e.

i don't agree with PaulofCthulu either.

but do you really want to go this route?

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

I don't get this argument. I told lots of great stories in 1st edition, 2nd edition, 3rd edition, and in 3.5. I think it boils down to the players you have. My strategy in those instances is to avoid the players that tend to drive the game in directions in which I know I won't have fun.

 

[PaulofCthulhu]

You were playing WLD, a giant death-trap of a campaign that screams "you're all going to die!" Having people expect combat optimized characters isn't particularly surprising under those circumstances. I'm sure you could run a plot heavy game in WLD but it's kinda contrary to the general image of WLD.

In my naiveté I thought it was going to be just a big adventuresome dungeon, alas that didn't turn out to be quite true, though we did have some fun with it over the year we played. Session #29 being one of my favourites, that had a fun battle section against giants and the Cleric being squished by an altar, but most of the non-combat fun the DM pretty much invented, so yes, I would in hindsight agree with you, that the WLD does seem to be just a big meatgrinder.

In the end, it's what each person wants out of their roleplaying games that matters, and that can be different for each person. Those who like earlier editions of D&D, like earlier editions, those who prefer later editions of D&D, like later editions. Your reasons for liking something may not match the same criteria as others. Such is the way. I play the editions I like, and I'm happy with that.

I do wish everyone happy adventuring with 4th edition. I will certainly peek at the books and ask friends about it when it's out.