Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="wingsandsword" data-source="post: 8507674" data-attributes="member: 14159">I disagree entirely.The alleged &quot;problem&quot; with 3e was all the &quot;forum meta&quot; and online culture that had people using 3e in ways it absolutely, positively was not designed for.All this &quot;CodZilla&quot; nonsense, and tiers, and other forum jargon. . .that cleanly divided 3e players into two camps:1. People who used online message boards and whose play style changed to incorporate powergame strategies from online.2. People whose gaming styles didn't change due to online powergame tricks, either because they didn't care, or weren't online.I knew a few people who tried to use all this forum talk stuff in actual games, they were insufferable and nobody wanted to game with them, because they were so upset that everyone else was playing to have fun. . .and not using optimal &quot;builds&quot; and other cheesy strategies.&nbsp; People who had played 1e and 2e and now were playing 3e the same way found 3e to work many times better, faster, and cleaner than AD&amp;D ever was.3e had only a closed playtest at WotC, among players who had been playing AD&amp;D 1e and 2e for years.&nbsp; It was pretty clearly designed and tested with that play style in mind.The vast majority of the people I played 3e with, especially in the early years of the 2000's, loved it as a clean, straightforward, intuitive improvement over AD&amp;D.&nbsp; So many of the 3.5e changes seemed completely superfluous, and only to further complicate the game, and I'd only learn later they were carefully worded rule patches for something someone had done at some point to break something by intentionally misreading the rules.It was a wonderfully written and well tested game. . .that after its release was met with a completely different and very hostile player culture than the one it was tested with.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="wingsandsword, post: 8507674, member: 14159"] I disagree entirely. The alleged "problem" with 3e was all the "forum meta" and online culture that had people using 3e in ways it absolutely, positively was not designed for. All this "CodZilla" nonsense, and tiers, and other forum jargon. . .that cleanly divided 3e players into two camps: 1. People who used online message boards and whose play style changed to incorporate powergame strategies from online. 2. People whose gaming styles didn't change due to online powergame tricks, either because they didn't care, or weren't online. I knew a few people who tried to use all this forum talk stuff in actual games, they were insufferable and nobody wanted to game with them, because they were so upset that everyone else was playing to have fun. . .and not using optimal "builds" and other cheesy strategies. People who had played 1e and 2e and now were playing 3e the same way found 3e to work many times better, faster, and cleaner than AD&D ever was. 3e had only a closed playtest at WotC, among players who had been playing AD&D 1e and 2e for years. It was pretty clearly designed and tested with that play style in mind. The vast majority of the people I played 3e with, especially in the early years of the 2000's, loved it as a clean, straightforward, intuitive improvement over AD&D. So many of the 3.5e changes seemed completely superfluous, and only to further complicate the game, and I'd only learn later they were carefully worded rule patches for something someone had done at some point to break something by intentionally misreading the rules. It was a wonderfully written and well tested game. . .that after its release was met with a completely different and very hostile player culture than the one it was tested with. [/QUOTE]

Verification