Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Blustar" data-source="post: 3029973" data-attributes="member: 34486">Can you please list some examples of this blatant obsession with Good vs. Evil in the core rules that wasn't there in 1ed? I won't even include 2ed which we know did away with all grey areas to appeal to the masses. Really, why do you think all 3rd edtion players play good vs. evil? I don't see it in the core rules anywhere espousing this type of gameplay. The base world in 3.x is Greyhawk and correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Iuz an "evil" adversary? Or were the Pc's supposed to ally with him? How about the ToEE? Didn't all these good aligned heavyweights come and save the day in Emridy Meadows. Weren't the PC's supposed to fight evil? (all this in 1ed too)"Old School" had plenty of Good vs. Evil and I know that D. Arneson was very much a Tolkien fan and there was much Evil in his campaign world. There are plenty of 3.x settings with slavery, zigurrats, reptilian kingdoms, and also the "us vs them" dynamic. And the "wee wee lets play with elves" is a pretty ignorant statement as you understand very little of what Elves are supposed to be like. Blame D&D for elves who are too "human". The wussification of Elves came from "old school" authors trying to make them more human -like so you could roleplay them I guess. Even Tolkien elves are supposed to be warlike and angelic as well as artistic. ( Hence they can see into the other planes of existence because they live in both at the same time) Not to mention elves as described by Poul Anderson in "The Broken Sword".They probably never should have been PC races. Last time I checked, WoHF (which I own) has elves...so does Rappan Athuk...There are plenty of "old-schooll" settings for d20/3.x including Wilerlands, THieves World, Conan, etc.. so where's the rub? There's something for everyone.Blue</blockquote>

Verification