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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scribble" data-source="post: 4276135" data-attributes="member: 23977">Wandering harlot tables aside, for me it's not a this edition = 1st edition.It's that this edition took the advances to the game 3e made, and polished them off so that the game as a whole plays a lot more like the D&D I knew in the past.It's the 3e idea of having a way to customize your character and do things outside of specific character powers, with the earlier idea of not getting bogged down in the details.Like skills, we have the 3e improvement (that if a character CAN do something he/she should be able to improve at doing it, and it should work in a uniform way that won't suprise you each time) without worrying too much about every incarnation/bonus penalty of the ability. It allows to the DM to be more "fluid" in running a game (something I feel earlier editions supported) while at the same time knowing he can fall back on a robust system that supports his decisions.To be fair, my AD&D 1E DMG DID have psionics... The game just didn't get a specific Psionics class until 2e.What makes a monster "core?"Is it simply because they've just always been in the first monster manual?The 4e monster manual offers plenty of monsters and the 4e DMG shows you how to build ones YOU think of. A group of players/DM can sit down and play all sorts of adventures and games. How is that not complete? If it didn't offer ANY monsters... or offered the monsters without powers that you had to buy later... then yeah maybe... But as it stands? The game can be played right out of the Box (well if you bought the boxed gift set.)Being different doesn't equate to being incomplete.</blockquote>

Verification