What kind of game should D&D be?--Forked Thread: When did I stop being...

[Herobizkit]

I opted for point buy. Sure, class/level may be a defining feature, but it's frustrating to try and shoehorn everything you want your character to do by multi-classing, or settling for less.

"Why don't you play GURPS, then?" If D&D = GURPS, I would. D&D has the safety net of familiarity, and combat tends to be a bit simpler. D&D's current class/level also has the tangible reward of gaining power; point-based systems don't have the same "ding!" feel when you gain more points and abilities at each level.

Skills and Powers, used responsibly, was IMO the best thing to happen to 2e. Mind you, in the run of 15 min of holding the book I helped create the gimpiest character I could, just to prove I could "legally". It was fun, but the campaign was short-lived, and so it went. I never used that book again... in fact, I didn't play D&D again until 3rd edition after that...

 

[The_Gneech]

3E ain't no hybrid. Don't be silly. The ability to allocate skill points is no more of a "point buy" game system than 1E/2E thieves being able to assign % points to their climb walls/open locks abilities.

Sheesh.

-The Gneech

 

[Mallus]

3E ain't no hybrid. Don't be silly. The ability to allocate skill points is no more of a "point buy" game system than 1E/2E thieves being able to assign % points to their climb walls/open locks abilities.

It's the lenient multiclassing rules and the magic item free market (which was the default assumption in 3e) make 3e a hybrid system in my book.

Just considering the common 3e practice of players being able to select the magic items they want --if they can pay for them-- it's easy to draw parallels between 3e and point-buy games like Mutants and Masterminds or Champions. All three games have a system that allows players to buy the 'superpowers' they choose.

 

[ExploderWizard]

3E ain't no hybrid. Don't be silly. The ability to allocate skill points is no more of a "point buy" game system than 1E/2E thieves being able to assign % points to their climb walls/open locks abilities.

Sheesh.

-The Gneech

Point buy is like a model car kit with a ton of parts. Choose the parts you want to assemble a car. The engine can be as fine tuned as you want to make it within certain design specs (point budget)

3E is like a model car kit with a pre-defined chassis (race) and engine (classes) that you can fine tune with extra parts (feats and skills). Adjustments to the engine can be made after assembly is complete (multiclassing)

4E kept the basic 3E model except the engines each come in a couple different models. The engine model chosen determines which extra parts work best in your car. Because of this certain cars tend to get built in an identical fashion.

 

[Obryn]

I voted class/level. If you don't have both, then I think you've parted ways with D&D. D&D has very few essential core features, imho, but if there's even one - it's a class/level advancement system. To me, there's no problem adding in skills and feats and the like; as long as there's a class and level system behind it, it's D&D.

1e and 2e (and earlier) were class-based, pretty much exclusively, with some quirks for multi-classing and dual-classing. 4e is also very class-based, possibly moreso than 1e/2e (if you disregard feats and skills), but with more flexibility within a single class. I think the reason some folks consider 3e to be a hybrid system is the buffet-style leveling. 3e is the only edition of D&D where, after advancing a level, it's necessary to ask every player, "Okay, what are you taking a level in?" (Again, this is disregarding feats and skills.) YMMV, but I've considered 3e to be a hybrid system ever since I started playing it.

-O

 

[thecasualoblivion]

It's the lenient multiclassing rules and the magic item free market (which was the default assumption in 3e) make 3e a hybrid system in my book.

Just considering the common 3e practice of players being able to select the magic items they want --if they can pay for them-- it's easy to draw parallels between 3e and point-buy games like Mutants and Masterminds or Champions. All three games have a system that allows players to buy the 'superpowers' they choose.

I hadn't thought of the magic item system when I called 3E a hybrid system, but this is a very good point.

I think the reason some folks consider 3e to be a hybrid system is the buffet-style leveling. 3e is the only edition of D&D where, after advancing a level, it's necessary to ask every player, "Okay, what are you taking a level in?" (Again, this is disregarding feats and skills.) YMMV, but I've considered 3e to be a hybrid system ever since I started playing it.

-O

Again, as Obryn says, I think multiclassing is what truly makes 3E a hybrid system. A point buy system gives you points to spend on abilities, and as you progress you get more points to spend. The buffet style multiclassing of 3E achieves the hybrid by making the levels themselves the points in the point buy, which you can spend on any base class or prestige class you qualify for.

 

[Umbran]

I think of 3e as still strongly class/level based, rather than a hybrid.

I think I prefer D&D with the class and level basis. I have other games for point-based generation and development, if I want it.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Just considering the common 3e practice of players being able to select the magic items they want --if they can pay for them-- it's easy to draw parallels between 3e and point-buy games like Mutants and Masterminds or Champions. All three games have a system that allows players to buy the 'superpowers' they choose.

It may have been common practice, but it wasn't in the rules. The core rules had set price limits for how much the highest priced item in a community could be worth and the maximum amount of movable assets they could muster if some PCs came in with cartloads of loot to sell. A lot of DMs just chose to not bother with that.

And really, how is 4E's advice to have the players make item "wish lists" much different?*

*I actually like this about 4E, and for years as DM have never done random treasure, always trying to place items that were a) logical to be there (lots of scrolls on a sorcerer, a longsword if it was used in the fight, etc...) and/or b) useful to the players. I'm not complaining about it, just pointing out it's about the same as the charge made against 3E I'm replying to.


I'll vote for class/level, but 3E is my cup of tea and I agree BESM is a better hybrid example. And I don't particularly mind hybrid, either. It's just that I only get one vote.

 

[Obryn]

I'll vote for class/level, but 3E is my cup of tea and I agree BESM is a better hybrid example. And I don't particularly mind hybrid, either. It's just that I only get one vote.

Hybrid and Class/Level aren't exclusive terms, fortunately.

I think D&D must have classes & levels, but that's significantly different from saying that D&D must only have classes & levels.

-O

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I think of 3e as still strongly class/level based, rather than a hybrid.

I think I prefer D&D with the class and level basis. I have other games for point-based generation and development, if I want it.

3E multiclassing devalues the meaning of character class to the point where I cannot call it a strong class based system. Barbarian2/Rogue3/Swashbuckler3/Swordsage2/Warblade10 makes for an excellent character mechanically, but one that has left any notion of character class in the dust.

It may have been common practice, but it wasn't in the rules. The core rules had set price limits for how much the highest priced item in a community could be worth and the maximum amount of movable assets they could muster if some PCs came in with cartloads of loot to sell. A lot of DMs just chose to not bother with that.

And really, how is 4E's advice to have the players make item "wish lists" much different?*

*I actually like this about 4E, and for years as DM have never done random treasure, always trying to place items that were a) logical to be there (lots of scrolls on a sorcerer, a longsword if it was used in the fight, etc...) and/or b) useful to the players. I'm not complaining about it, just pointing out it's about the same as the charge made against 3E I'm replying to.


I'll vote for class/level, but 3E is my cup of tea and I agree BESM is a better hybrid example. And I don't particularly mind hybrid, either. It's just that I only get one vote.

1. Free access in buying magic items in 3E was suggested in the DMG, and so can be considered core.
2. Magic items were a critical part of character customization and optimization in 4E, while they have a much smaller impact in 4E.
3. In 4E, what you can buy/afford/create is always less than what you find in treasure hoards, emphasizing found items over bought items. 3E's Wealth by level allowed you to purchase optimal gear.