Find content
Not Telling
Welcome aboard Jolyth. I'm sure things will run smoothly and all that jazz.
VH
VigaHrolf
Member Since 02 Apr 2004Offline Last Active Apr 06 2009 06:31 AM
Posts I've Made
In Topic: Comments on "A Meeting of Like Minds"
20 November 2004 - 03:18 PM
Pitchfork? dry.gif Ha! Peanuts! Too good for you! tongue.gif
Oh...
He's still alive! So there!
Pitchfork? (I'll loan you my pointy stick+2 biggrin.gif )
Nice, nice work, VH. But I felt a little sympathy 'twinge' in my hands as I read through the healing ritual.. *ouch*
MG
Thanks MG. Well, for everything else other than the pitchfork/pointy stick. That's just mean.
Nice work, VigaHrolf.
. Sorry, I only just came back from camp, else I'd have commented earlier. You've done a great job! Just continue it... please? Pretty please?
Thank you very much Shadowhawke. And no worries.
As to continuing... it may be. But I don't know about that right now. So I guess it's just.. watch this space?
VH
In Topic: 3E vs AD&D
12 November 2004 - 10:30 PM
As to complexity, I think 3rd edition heaped on too much. The feats (which feats do I have? Which are operating?), the various armor classes (deflection, base, flatfooted, unarmored), the extra rolls with magical spells, and all the modifiers, well, it dragged a lot of situations out for me as both player and DM. When you have limited time to play, I want to spend it roleplaying, not rolling dice. And that's where 3rd edition ticked me off.
Finally, on the stats thing... I understand your point about how a 17 means you're 1 point closer to an 18, which means only 4 levels to get there. But, that also means that for 4 levels, one of the hardest stat combinations to get, a 17, is still only as good as a 16. And if you have all even numbers, well then that 1 point every four levels is rather worthless until you move up 8 levels.
Have you ever heard of Chivalry and Sorcery? That was complicated. A beautiful system, but really complicated. Honestly, a lot of gamers simply aren't interested in the challenges of roleplaying. They don't want to invest the time and imagination needed to take average stats and create a truly memorable character.
Happy Trails . . .
Mark
Never heard of it actually. But really, my experience is limited to D&D and White Wolf, both which have their pluses and minuses. And as to the challenges of roleplaying, I think the stats things matter on the campaign. I think the true key is balance, no one character in the group overpowering another. That's the way to get a good flow and good roleplaying going. The way to have the most fun, as it is truly the goal, no?
VH
In Topic: 3E vs AD&D
12 November 2004 - 11:54 AM
Since it's been resurrected, I guess I'll weigh in again.
Now, I will admit that some of my arguments are colored in nostalgia. I've got years of time logged into 2nd edition as opposed to maybe a little under a year for 3rd. But I also put that in as a marker to show I have played 3rd, as both player and DM.
My groups were generally good groups. Almost exclusively roleplayers, not so much power munchkins. But, it didn't take long for that to start to creep in. It's because the system lends itself IMHO for powergaming. Paladin thief mages running around blasting things (not that I saw one thankfully) And I noticed myself falling for it too.. when suddenly you can just start tinkering with everything. It's a lot of temptation.
However, this is probably one of those items that people love or hate. Some love it for being able to have whatever you want and others hate it for the same reason. I felt it cheapened the great classes and powers and I also hated having to be the bad guy and turn down an idea. *shrug* that's just me.
As to complexity, I think 3rd edition heaped on too much. The feats (which feats do I have? Which are operating?), the various armor classes (deflection, base, flatfooted, unarmored), the extra rolls with magical spells, and all the modifiers, well, it dragged a lot of situations out for me as both player and DM. When you have limited time to play, I want to spend it roleplaying, not rolling dice. And that's where 3rd edition ticked me off.
And bloody horrible AoO's. I hate em.
Finally, on the stats thing... I understand your point about how a 17 means you're 1 point closer to an 18, which means only 4 levels to get there. But, that also means that for 4 levels, one of the hardest stat combinations to get, a 17, is still only as good as a 16. And if you have all even numbers, well then that 1 point every four levels is rather worthless until you move up 8 levels.
I like the simplified adjustments (for the most part). They're a lot easier to deal with than a lot of the stuff out of version 2. But there weer certain 2nd edition adjustments that were great. Such as wisdom giving lots of extra spells to clerics (not that the 3rd model is bad) or having your actual weight allowance spelled out for easy reference. They just took too many of my tables away, tables that simplified things for me.
Oh and getting rid of exceptional strength is nothing I'm going to complain about. I liked the bonuses.. but yeah. (xx) can go away.
Now, this isn't to say that 3rd edition is crap, in case anyone thought I said that. It isn't bad, it's just... flawed in my opinion. They made things mroe simple and more complicated at the same time. More dice rolling is bad.
Oh well.. continue on.
P.S.: JPS.. no worries
VH
Now, I will admit that some of my arguments are colored in nostalgia. I've got years of time logged into 2nd edition as opposed to maybe a little under a year for 3rd. But I also put that in as a marker to show I have played 3rd, as both player and DM.
My groups were generally good groups. Almost exclusively roleplayers, not so much power munchkins. But, it didn't take long for that to start to creep in. It's because the system lends itself IMHO for powergaming. Paladin thief mages running around blasting things (not that I saw one thankfully) And I noticed myself falling for it too.. when suddenly you can just start tinkering with everything. It's a lot of temptation.
However, this is probably one of those items that people love or hate. Some love it for being able to have whatever you want and others hate it for the same reason. I felt it cheapened the great classes and powers and I also hated having to be the bad guy and turn down an idea. *shrug* that's just me.
As to complexity, I think 3rd edition heaped on too much. The feats (which feats do I have? Which are operating?), the various armor classes (deflection, base, flatfooted, unarmored), the extra rolls with magical spells, and all the modifiers, well, it dragged a lot of situations out for me as both player and DM. When you have limited time to play, I want to spend it roleplaying, not rolling dice. And that's where 3rd edition ticked me off.
And bloody horrible AoO's. I hate em.
Finally, on the stats thing... I understand your point about how a 17 means you're 1 point closer to an 18, which means only 4 levels to get there. But, that also means that for 4 levels, one of the hardest stat combinations to get, a 17, is still only as good as a 16. And if you have all even numbers, well then that 1 point every four levels is rather worthless until you move up 8 levels.
I like the simplified adjustments (for the most part). They're a lot easier to deal with than a lot of the stuff out of version 2. But there weer certain 2nd edition adjustments that were great. Such as wisdom giving lots of extra spells to clerics (not that the 3rd model is bad) or having your actual weight allowance spelled out for easy reference. They just took too many of my tables away, tables that simplified things for me.
Oh and getting rid of exceptional strength is nothing I'm going to complain about. I liked the bonuses.. but yeah. (xx) can go away.
Now, this isn't to say that 3rd edition is crap, in case anyone thought I said that. It isn't bad, it's just... flawed in my opinion. They made things mroe simple and more complicated at the same time. More dice rolling is bad.
Oh well.. continue on.
P.S.: JPS.. no worries
VH
