What is 3.0 & 3.5 missing that previous editions had?

[Azlan]

Sounds like a problem with players to me. We still "just play the game" in my neck of the woods.

Hmm... With over 6,000 posts, here at EN World, I'd say that you, Joshua Dyal, do more than "just play the game".

 

[diaglo]

Hmm... With over 6,000 posts, here at EN World, I'd say that you, Joshua Dyal, do more than "just play the game".

post count means nothing.

i've got that many on WotC under a couple names.

 

[Desdichado]

Hmm... With over 6,000 posts, here at EN World, I'd say that you, Joshua Dyal, do more than "just play the game".

Nah, three quarters of those posts are inane one-liners and bad jokes.

 

[buzz]

In your opinion what is that special something that the earlier editions had that all of us old gamers are now missing with the new editions?

I agree with Davelozzi; it's all nostalgia, even if said nostalgia is for 2e.

Sure, I miss Dave Trampier's art, and I agree with others (and Monte Cook, who did a LoS about this) that 3.x could use a little less portraiture and a bit more evocative-scene-illustration...

BUT...

There is really nothing about the actual *rules* of previous editions that I have any interest in going back to. Nor am I interested (consistently) in the massive hack n' slash dungeon-crawls that comprised many of the "classic" modules. I honestly don't want "3rd edition rules, 1st edition feel." I want 3rd edition rules with a 3rd edition feel. This is part of the reason I have no ineterst in Hackmaster.

I also much prefer the 3e look, at least up until recently (i.e., post WotC getting rid of Sam Wood and Todd Lockwood for the most part), *especially* in comparison to most of the 2e products I've seen. That stuff is just plain hideous, IMHO, barring Brom, DiTerlizzi, and a few others.

 

[johnsemlak]

3E is missing one very important thing: Me being 18 and having nothing to do all day but design dungeons and my campaign world.

I'd say it's missing me being 11 and having nothing to do but design dungeons, (bad) campaign worlds, re-read modules 20 times over, create new races/classes, and just play.

By the time I was 18 I only had time to design dungeons all day

 

[LightPhoenix]

Yeah, I would definitely say it's the nostalgia factor. It's like your first boyfriend/girlfriend... you always have a certain fondness, a certain remembrance for the first one.

 

[Particle_Man]

I miss the fact that the 1st ed. illusionist had a way, way different spell-list than the regular magic-user. There were spells that were unique to each list, and there were spells that were at different levels on each list. With 2nd ed., the arcane spells were all glommed together. In 3rd ed., the bard has a few unique spells, and cleric and druid are still separate from each other in some spells (and from arcane spells in general) but there is no spell that an illusionist can cast that a regular non-specialized wizard cannot. Unearthed Arcana has a possible solution to this by giving special abilities to the specialized wizards. I guess there is no easy way to put the genie back in the bottle.

Oh, and the munchkin part of me missed double specialization, but Complete Warrior fixed that.

 

[I'm A Banana]

From what I can tell, it's gone a little something like this:

1e: "Let's play a game!" You go into the dungeon, you slay the dragon, you don it's treasure, move to the next town, and repeat. There is "the best," and "the suck," and it's all an attempt to overthrow the challenges put before your characters. And don't piss off the judge.

2e: "Let's tell a tale!" Enough with the dungeons....you don't just kill monsters, you save princesses, earn reputation, and are a living, breathing part of the world. The idioms should be played, because everyone likes them, and elves, as the most beautiful and lyrical of the races, rawk your jocks.

3e: "Let's have some fun." Screw this 'the best' stuff, and if you want to play against your type, go for it. It's just there for your enjoyment...can't take it too seriously, or it starts becoming a bit unhealthy for ya....there is a world beyond D&D, and D&D can be a fun after-work activity for a group of friends. It's a game. Enjoy it how you want to enjoy it, and let the rules help you make it fun. If you like to tell stories, let's help you do that. If you like to raid dungeons, let's help you do that. If you like to do a little of both, go for it. We're here to help you have fun.

The art is pure nostalgia/taste issue. There's nothing 'wrong' with the 3e art, because everyone likes different things. IMHO, the 1e art was cartoony, rediculous, and corny. At best, it was visceral, a bit pulpy. At worst, it was a comic strip or a coloring book. The 2e art was good....great setting, environment, and world. You wanted your game to be a part of it. The 3e art is good, too....great characters, evocative movements, and images that leap off the page and into the imagination. You want it to be a part of your game.

The rules, most anyone can agree, are better. They are a bit more complex, but I can still have a n00b starting in less than one minute, because the best way to learn is to learn as you go.

A good chunk of edition warz is nostalgia. But the editions do have a different feel, reflecting their different design philosophies, I think. They had different intentions when making them. I think the rock comparison is apt: OD&D was the unchiseled peak, 1e was the boulder carved from it, 2e was the block made from that boulder, and 3e is the floor made out of that block. Increasing complexity, but different use for all levels.

Oh, and as for this:

I miss the fact that the 1st ed. illusionist had a way, way different spell-list than the regular magic-user. There were spells that were unique to each list, and there were spells that were at different levels on each list. With 2nd ed., the arcane spells were all glommed together. In 3rd ed., the bard has a few unique spells, and cleric and druid are still separate from each other in some spells (and from arcane spells in general) but there is no spell that an illusionist can cast that a regular non-specialized wizard cannot. Unearthed Arcana has a possible solution to this by giving special abilities to the specialized wizards. I guess there is no easy way to put the genie back in the bottle.

I agree, and I've fixed it IMC by offering special abilities, new, unique spells, and limiting the spell lists of the casters....so now the Illusionist casts ONLY illusion spells, has the UA special abilities, and gets new illusion spells that your average Wizard can't touch......it's no more complex than crafting a new class, though that's probably the most modding I've done for D&D, so I may have it easy. ^_^;

 

[Gundark]

I always thought the racial limitations that were availible in 1st ed. were a neat idea ( ie. Elves could only have a maximum natural strength of 16, humans could never have a natural dexterity greater than 18). However I also understand why this sort of thing would never work in 3.X

 

[Rashak Mani]

By the time I was 18 I only had time to design dungeons all day

Don't women spoil our RPG lives ! Before I started dating I played so much more...