Where D&D goes bad

[MrFilthyIke]

Original D&D(1974) is the only true game. All the other editions are just poor imitations of the real thing.

Didn't see that coming. Hey, we should have a contest. Guess how many times diaglo has typed the above sentance. The closest to the true number wins some type of OD&D prize. Like guessing jelly beans in a jar!

And back on track, I prefer the basic core books, but sometimes cool ideas sprout up in side books, so I say: Yes and No.

edit: four spelin'

 

[DaveMage]

D&D 3/3.5E has used the phrase "options not restrictions" to help define itself.

 

[MrFilthyIke]

D&D 3/3.5E has used the phrase "options not restrictions" to help define itself.

That was basically what Monte Cook said in a seminar in '01. The systems was based on positive benefits, not restrictions and flaws and penalties.

 

[Plane Sailing]

In my personal opinion I don't like the multiplicity of prestige classes showered down upon us, I'm very disappointed that WotC led the charge away from their original concept in Monte Cook's DMG. I think they have done more bad than good for the game in that respect. Nor do I think that the 3 core books are perfect summations of all that I want to run D&D either.

Can I tell you about one of the innovations that I like best about 3e?

The fact that it encourages DM's to tinker with the rules and create new classes, combinations etc.

There is no way that I'd give 'carte blanche' to allowing any or all splatbooks into a campaign that I was running, but I'd be happy to specify new rules or classes etc that could be considered by the players for that campaign - whether from 3rd party books or from my own imagination (most often the latter).

Cheers

 

[Li Shenron]

D&D 3/3.5E has used the phrase "options not restrictions" to help define itself.

Yet in my experience (you can see that in these very forums) whenever someone asks people if it's ok to play something in a way not written in the book, most of us kinda get paladins of the written word and go "I wouldn't allow it" or "if you do it, you're houseruling".

IOW, we are here buying more stuff every month because we don't feel like we have the rights to play what we already have in a different way than what the book says to the last word.

There is a difference between (1) having a ruleset complex enough to let you customise to a small detail therefore generating endless combinations, and
(2) having books coming out with endless combinations that everyone think you must used as written or nothing.
Probably I am too naive and think that phrase meant (1) but instead it meant (2)...

 

[Psion]

But still, it mystifies this. The D&D core rules are a moderately complex rule set that meshes fairly well together - and all those optional books only add unnecessary layers of complexity in my eyes. Sure, they might allow you to tweak your character exactly as you want - but what for?

The dogged insistence of some to eshew everything but the core rules mystifies me. There are a lot of great ideas out there. If you can use them and they add to your campaign, why not use them?

If I wanted to create characters that are fine-tuned exactly the way I want, I'd rather play GURPS - which does it faster and better.

I don't see that. Sure, you could throw a set of hand-picked abilities and powers together. But that won't give you already fleshed out character concepts like prestige classes do, and it won't make players take abilities that fit their concept but may not be optimimum. Seeing that such a thing happens is handholding and reviewing that will take time.

 

[MerricB]

My campaign is enriched by the material my players find in the supplements. It'd never occur to me to use it, but by their decisions, they create the world they play in.

A player wants to become a Dragon Disciple? Fantastic - let's see where that takes the game!

The choice of a character to become a Shadow Dancer caused a major plotline to begin in my campaign, and it was wonderful.

Cheers!

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

The dogged insistence of some to eshew everything but the core rules mystifies me. There are a lot of great ideas out there. If you can use them and they add to your campaign, why not use them?

I don't mind adding a rule or two from other books - like you said, there are a lot of great ideas out there. But when every single PC uses some of these "optional rules" sooner or later, then there is something wrong IMO.

I don't see that. Sure, you could throw a set of hand-picked abilities and powers together. But that won't give you already fleshed out character concepts like prestige classes do, and it won't make players take abilities that fit their concept but may not be optimimum. Seeing that such a thing happens is handholding and reviewing that will take time.

The core characters and prestige classes are already-fleshed out character concepts. If you are going to add an endless list of new concepts to them, then why bother with a class system at all?

And points-buy character systems like GURPS allow you to fine-tune your character to a concept much more than d20 ever will - even with all the Complete books. And I don't buy your argument about "optimization" - someone who worries too much about "optimizing" his characters will pick prestige classes that make him more effective, rather than those who pick his character concept. Same as with GURPS.

 

[Scribble]

I've said it before, but there's only so many times you can do the whole Lord of The Rings like party before it just gets old...

D&D is fun, but seriously if every game was my elf fights an orc?

I've been gaming for about 13 years now with a small break durring the last couple of college years. After a while you just need a change.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

I've been gaming for about 13 years now with a small break durring the last couple of college years. After a while you just need a change.

This is a sentiment I can understand. But if I want a change now and then, I'll play another game entirely, instead of D&D with a zillion optional rules...

(If it wasn't clear from my last postings, these are my own feelings on this matter. The standard disclaimers apply: YMMV, etc.)