I don’t think that’s even remotely true. I enjoyed that edition quite a lot. I do think that the more that was added, the more difficult it became to run. Or perhaps, the more effort was required for the same end result.
I don’t have anything against complexity. I just want complex design to be rewarding. The increase in complexity for 3.X as it went along did not result in a corresponding increase in enjoyment.
It’s just a matter of preference. There’s no need to try and put people down for having a different view.
this particular part makes the intent of my post clear:
"Anyone/any group that puts the time and thought in to set up some table rules and norms completely avoids anything resembling "brokenness" in that edition"
this particular part makes the intent of my post clear:
"Anyone/any group that puts the time and thought in to set up some table rules and norms completely avoids anything resembling "brokenness" in that edition"
Sure, I understand that. I agree that the game worked with effort. I played every iteration of 3.X for years. I’m not saying the game is not fun, or that it can't work.
You’re saying that any group of players has to decide what to allow in their game. This is reasonable, and likely very good advice for anyone who’s going to play the game.
What it’s not is a defense of the design choices made by the game’s creators. The design is the whole thing.
For me as a DM, my time would be better spent prepping for a game by making a map and some interesting NPCs and a few story hooks for the PCs, rather than having to brush up on the latest splatbook because the PCs have leveled and I need to know the new feats and spells they’re likely to take.
That’s the kind of trade off I’m talking about. The effort to make the game work, for me, was better spent elsewhere.
Sure, I understand that. I agree that the game worked with effort. I played every iteration of 3.X for years. I’m not saying the game is not fun, or that it can't work.
You’re saying that any group of players has to decide what to allow in their game. This is reasonable, and likely very good advice for anyone who’s going to play the game.
What it’s not is a defense of the design choices made by the game’s creators. The design is the whole thing.
For me as a DM, my time would be better spent prepping for a game by making a map and some interesting NPCs and a few story hooks for the PCs, rather than having to brush up on the latest splatbook because the PCs have leveled and I need to know the new feats and spells they’re likely to take.
That’s the kind of trade off I’m talking about. The effort to make the game work, for me, was better spent elsewhere.
Im saying it worked with low effort (gor years) though provided you took the time to put effort in ahead. It massively reduced how much effort you needed later. At least to the point that you didnt need anywhere near the amount people constantly complain about needing. Im saying i dont think so much is needed unless you go about it the wrong way. Which is to say, not just getting everything established ahead.
Ive never had to put much effort in on a regular basis because my group always just got that out of the way far in advance.
Thats the one thing about 3.x. If you want a low work load you simply must get things pre-established. This is all i mean.
And then it works for years. And it will be decades soon.
Im saying it worked with low effort (gor years) though provided you took the time to put effort in ahead. It massively reduced how much effort you needed later. At least to the point that you didnt need anywhere near the amount people constantly complain about needing. Im saying i dont think so much is needed unless you go about it the wrong way. Which is to say, not just getting everything established ahead.
Ive never had to put much effort in on a regular basis because my group always just got that out of the way far in advance.
Thats the one thing about 3.x. If you want a low work load you simply must get things pre-established. This is all i mean.
And then it works for years. And it will be decades soon.
For something like Pathfinder, where there is a ton of material available with a click of the mouse, I find it difficult to get "group buy-in" (for want of a better term) to the concept of restricting things.
Even restrictions that are self-evident to me have to be justified by argument, with occasional re-hashes when people randomly feel the urge to complain that I've banned Black Tentacles or whatever (3.5 version; I'm not a big fan of the Pathfinder version either, but it isn't quite so tedious in play).
The GM also needs to have some fun, and (for example) having every boss monster "exhausted" from the second round onwards of every combat just isn't fun for me, but its interpreted as me being mean to them.
PC sorcerer with insane initiative modifier goes first, targets monster with Ray of Exhaustion, monster makes Fortitude save and is fatigued when it gets to act, PC sorcerer repeats spell at start of second round, player insists that as per spell wording, fatigued monster is now exhausted with no save (-6 to strength and dexterity, forcing me to recalculate attacks, damage, AC and reflex saves, and the monster spends the rest of the combat as a punch bag and can only move at half speed.)
For something like Pathfinder, where there is a ton of material available with a click of the mouse, I find it difficult to get "group buy-in" (for want of a better term) to the concept of restricting things.
Even restrictions that are self-evident to me have to be justified by argument, with occasional re-hashes when people randomly feel the urge to complain that I've banned Black Tentacles or whatever (3.5 version; I'm not a big fan of the Pathfinder version either, but it isn't quite so tedious in play).
The GM also needs to have some fun, and (for example) having every boss monster "exhausted" from the second round onwards of every combat just isn't fun for me, but its interpreted as me being mean to them.
PC sorcerer with insane initiative modifier goes first, targets monster with Ray of Exhaustion, monster makes Fortitude save and is fatigued when it gets to act, PC sorcerer repeats spell at start of second round, player insists that as per spell wording, fatigued monster is now exhausted with no save (-6 to strength and dexterity, forcing me to recalculate attacks, damage, AC and reflex saves, and the monster spends the rest of the combat as a punch bag and can only move at half speed.)
In practice weve only restricted rules ahead of time that completely conflict with something (other rules, campaign world consistancy yada yada). You would have to do the same in any game that has enough content.
