Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Orius" data-source="post: 8462711" data-attributes="member: 8863">A few things:My earlier comments on the origns of the classes was that 3e was mostly updating legacy classes that had already long been a part of D&amp;D.&nbsp; It wasn't like 3.5's base classes that were specifically designed to fill what were perceived gaps in the game.&nbsp; Needless to say, in any future 3e games I run, the vast majority of those base classes will be firmly banned.Voadam was pretty much right on saves.&nbsp; Pre 3e had a save chart with 5 columns for each save category.&nbsp; If there was a save applicable to multiple columns the left most column took priority.&nbsp; It's harder for me to judge how the classes compared on saves in 2e vs 3e without making a chart since they started with different numbers and advanced at different rates.&nbsp; D&amp;D had a very similar system to AD&amp;D but there were some small differences; however the two systems more or less worked the same way.&nbsp; Another big difference was that Pre-3e saves tend to be pretty specific while 3e's saves are more generalized.&nbsp; That makes it easier for a DM to assign saves in unique cases.&nbsp; Before 3e, it was pretty clear which save applied in the standard circumstances, but if you tried to do something unusual it could be harder to figure out what the appropriate save should be.Wizards definitely got stronger as the leveled before 3e, but there's a few more things to take into account.&nbsp; First, the older rules weren't concerned about balance in single unconnected encounters.&nbsp; Balance was about the campaign as a whole.&nbsp; Sure the wizard got stronger, but that's the reward for starting frail with the slowest XP progression.&nbsp; Characters also got followers at name level, and that was when becoming a ruler, commanding armies and such came into play.&nbsp; The fighter got a small army at level 9 when he established a stronghold and it was expected that he'd use that as the core of a larger army.&nbsp; Other classes got followers, but usually less.&nbsp; The wizard for example might get a handful of apprentices at name level and not all editions gave them to the wizard.&nbsp; If the wizard wanted an army, he'd raise the whole thing with cash, he didn't get a core body of loyal followers like the fighter.&nbsp; When this aspect of the game fell out of play, it indirectly nerfed the fighter.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Orius, post: 8462711, member: 8863"] A few things: My earlier comments on the origns of the classes was that 3e was mostly updating legacy classes that had already long been a part of D&D. It wasn't like 3.5's base classes that were specifically designed to fill what were perceived gaps in the game. Needless to say, in any future 3e games I run, the vast majority of those base classes will be firmly banned. Voadam was pretty much right on saves. Pre 3e had a save chart with 5 columns for each save category. If there was a save applicable to multiple columns the left most column took priority. It's harder for me to judge how the classes compared on saves in 2e vs 3e without making a chart since they started with different numbers and advanced at different rates. D&D had a very similar system to AD&D but there were some small differences; however the two systems more or less worked the same way. Another big difference was that Pre-3e saves tend to be pretty specific while 3e's saves are more generalized. That makes it easier for a DM to assign saves in unique cases. Before 3e, it was pretty clear which save applied in the standard circumstances, but if you tried to do something unusual it could be harder to figure out what the appropriate save should be. Wizards definitely got stronger as the leveled before 3e, but there's a few more things to take into account. First, the older rules weren't concerned about balance in single unconnected encounters. Balance was about the campaign as a whole. Sure the wizard got stronger, but that's the reward for starting frail with the slowest XP progression. Characters also got followers at name level, and that was when becoming a ruler, commanding armies and such came into play. The fighter got a small army at level 9 when he established a stronghold and it was expected that he'd use that as the core of a larger army. Other classes got followers, but usually less. The wizard for example might get a handful of apprentices at name level and not all editions gave them to the wizard. If the wizard wanted an army, he'd raise the whole thing with cash, he didn't get a core body of loyal followers like the fighter. When this aspect of the game fell out of play, it indirectly nerfed the fighter. [/QUOTE]

Verification