Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bendris Noulg" data-source="post: 1542233" data-attributes="member: 6398">Advice?&nbsp; Yes, I'll agree that the rules for the previous editions were indeed light on advice.&nbsp; However, they did include things to encourage it.&nbsp; The rules encouraged game environment considerations.&nbsp; The rules encouraged considering characterisation before mechanical gains.&nbsp; The rules encouraged story-focus and campaign-level development.&nbsp; It could be seen in the racial descriptions.&nbsp; It was seen in the classes.&nbsp; It was especially seen in the kits.&nbsp; It was part of the campaign setting descriptions of the various lands within those campaigns.&nbsp; It was part of the Planescape Factions.&nbsp; It was everywhere.&nbsp;That is what is missing from 3E.&nbsp; It's absent from the rule books.&nbsp; It's absent from the modules.&nbsp; It's absent from the accessories.&nbsp; It's absent from the campaigns.&nbsp; It's absent.&nbsp; Period.&nbsp;And that's my problem with the rules: It's an RPG that doesn't even attempt to encourage role-play.&nbsp; Indeed, it barely pays it lip-service.&nbsp;I don't think the rules require a solid treatment of role-play.&nbsp; I do think role-play deserves a little more consideration than the 2-3 paragraphs it's given in the DMG, though (and that's not even about role-play, but about games that focus on role-play, which really leaves very little for the new gamer to consider).&nbsp;All that's given for the new gamer to consider is the &quot;Social Skills&quot;, which, as written, don't involve role-play at all.&nbsp; As such, they become the role-play&nbsp; for the new gamer because there is no reference of using these Skills with role-play (which, as far as I'm concerned, is the only way to use them).&nbsp;Here we are in total agreement.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bendris Noulg, post: 1542233, member: 6398"] Advice? Yes, I'll agree that the rules for the previous editions were indeed light on advice. However, they did include things to encourage it. The rules [i]encouraged[/i] game environment considerations. The rules [i]encouraged[/i] considering characterisation before mechanical gains. The rules [i]encouraged[/i] story-focus and campaign-level development. It could be seen in the racial descriptions. It was seen in the classes. It was especially seen in the kits. It was part of the campaign setting descriptions of the various lands within those campaigns. It was part of the [i]Planescape[/i] Factions. It was everywhere. [i]That[/i] is what is missing from 3E. It's absent from the rule books. It's absent from the modules. It's absent from the accessories. It's absent from the campaigns. It's absent. Period. And that's my problem with the rules: It's an RPG that doesn't even [i]attempt[/i] to encourage role-play. Indeed, it barely pays it lip-service. I don't think the rules require a solid treatment of role-play. I do think role-play deserves a[i] little more[/i] consideration than the 2-3 paragraphs it's given in the DMG, though (and that's not even about role-play, but about games that focus on role-play, which really leaves very little for the new gamer to consider). All that's given for the new gamer to consider is the "Social Skills", which, as written, don't involve role-play at all. As such, they [i]become[/i] the role-play for the new gamer because there is no reference of using these Skills [i]with[/i] role-play (which, as far as I'm concerned, is the [i]only[/i] way to use them). Here we are in [i]total[/i] agreement. [/QUOTE]

Verification