Post/Author/DateTime	Post
wayward_sage 04-30-04, 06:48 AM	As a long time roleplayer i'd like to throw my opinion into the ring here. And it involves the Realms in many ways. With the change over from 2nd ed to 3rd ed I've noticed alot of change in Forgotten Realms. Alot of it has to do with much of the books being jam packed with rules and not much story or history info. Yes, its there. But it seems that 3rd ed. overall has made a massive turn toward being rule heavy and power gamming and less story. Now let me clarify, I play and DM 3rd ed. Forgotten Realms. I just think things have become very rules heavy. I mean, i pulled out my rule books one time at the table and started laughing. My buddies said, "What are you laughing about?" I was like, do you see this huge stack of books i'm holding? What other game do you know thats this complicated? But this also comes back to what makes DnD cool yet hard to get new people interested in. Its complicated, lets not forget to mention that on top of the rules, you've got to learn about the world of forgotten realms. The game is so difficult sometimes that I make mistakes constantly. Miscalculating hit dice, encumbrance, AC...But you know what? Why does it matter? Its about having fun with your friends, telling great stories and creating memorable characters. I'll continue to play DnD/Forgotten Realms because of these things. And when DnD stops becoming about them, then i'll stop. Just my opinion. Anyone else share it? Disagree? JON
Cunning Linguist 04-30-04, 08:33 AM	Well, there are more rules in 3.ed then there was in 2.ed But are they harder? No, not so. 2.ed was a heap of rules, on a heap of rules, that was supported by Ad-Hoc rules that made almost no sense, but where there to make things more like real life. 3.ed is far more streamlined. Now, I don't know what kind of books you had with you when your buddies where laughing at you, but 2.ed had it's fair share of books also. The Monsters Manual, Players Handbook and DM Guide in 2.ed where just as big as the ones in 3.ed, but 3.ed are better looking. As for the FRCS, well, the 2.ed Box set is far thicker, and contains several books with rules.
ClobberinTime 04-30-04, 09:21 AM	Yeah I agree, 3ed is much much better. I've played 1sted from 1978 and went through 2nd ed too. You can really put the roleplaying in the game mechanics in a way you couldn't in 2ed. 2ed was a nightmare on the rules there were so many exceptions and special cases that you really did need a set of tomes. The special abilities also became really imbalanced. As a FR dm I generally throw out the stuff from sword and fist etc... It was becoming imbalanced in a 2ed kind of way with players taking 1 or 2 levels in things for special abilities. anyways, thats my 2 cents.
TheLeviathan 04-30-04, 09:29 AM	If anything, I find that the amount of books I'm using has gone down. The splat books aren't really more rules, they're just a smattering of new feats and PrC's. I no longer need a copy of combat tactics, spell tactics, and every class AND race handbook under the sun. Also, I found the original forgotten realms source book to be absolutely packed with game history, as well as the magic of faerun, and the players guide to faerun. I also own the silver marches (big mistake, I only wanted the splat portion of it, and it wasn't that great), and between the 4 books, there is certainly alot more roleplaying than rollplaying compared to, say, the meager offerings given to dragonlance. I do see your point however. With the new rules, a twink can create a template that is simply out of whack. We've got a guy playing a cavalier (the charge monkey as I call it) who can hit for upwards of 350-400 points of pure damage when he charges, as well as a barbarian battleraging weaponmaster who belts out about 5 attacks a round, hitting for 150-200 a crack. In this new era of powergaming, roleplaying can be pushed aside easily if not checked by the players in your group.
Lashan 04-30-04, 11:00 AM	I think that Sean K. Reynolds put the whole "crunch" vs "fluff" argument best in this article: The Story of Donut Cores and Forgotten Rums (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/gaming/forgottenrumsstory.html) So, with that in mind, I have noticed that the 3E has more rules (PrC's, feats, spells, etc) then back story. I do lament that. It is due to the people who buy FR stuff, but never want to play in FR. They are trying to sell more product. As for 3E vs 2E game mechanics? I am a total convert. I was unsure at first and pretty resistant to 3E. I read the rules, though, and was intrigued enough to try it. Since I have, I am a big fan of 3E. The rules are so so much better. Beyond that, I am not quite sure what you meant in your original post. Was it the rules heavy comment? Or that 3E rules are worse? I do agree that if you aren't having fun, then it isn't worth doing.
Brahzs M'ahnkei 04-30-04, 11:14 AM	D&D has always been geared more towards hack-n-slash or combat than roleplaying. What's the traditional "point" of the game? Make your way through a dungeon/decrepid castle/crazy wizard maze killing the denizens thereof and taking their possessions as your own. Don't get me wrong, I'm not critical of this- I enjoy a good sword-fest as much as the next guy. And that's not to say that D&D _can't_ be more roleplay than combat, but the system just isn't designed for it. Gary Gygax modeled the game after wartime strategy/ miniature games for love of Pete! Sure, there are books published with regional histories, different ethnic groups and other tasty tidbits to add to our games, but personally I think it's for flavor text. Granted, that's alot of "flavor text" (gotta love marketing! ;) ), but any group that I've ever played D&D with uses those materials as such; what's the first thing most of us look for in a new book? New feats & prestige classes. In some other, more role-play styled games, we used to label a gamenight "successful" if we went through _no_ combat; by comparison, any D&D group I've been with is disappointed at the least, (angry and frustrated at the most) if there is no combat within the first 45 minutes. Once again, let me stress that this post is not a complaint or criticism, merely a commentary on gameplay design & style. I mean, after all, if I didn't like the game, I wouldn't play it. ;) That is all.
TheLeviathan 04-30-04, 12:24 PM	I guess I'm simply fortunate that my game group has a healthy mix of both 'action' and roleplaying.
Faraer 04-30-04, 01:44 PM	3rd edition D&D is a complex system by the standards of RPGs as a whole. It was designed to be -- look at Jonathan Tweet's other work to see what else he can do -- partly to fit with the marketing direction which was to sell to existing and lapsed RPGers. Wizards is finally about to make a major attempt to attract new players, the big chunk of people -- we hope -- who would love the medium of RPGs but who are put off by 300-page rulebooks, rules for rules' sake, and 'gamer' culture. There's no disputing that the design philosophy of the new D&D is very different from the design philosophy of the Realms. Of course, the ruleset doesn't dictate that you adopt its philosophy wholesale, but system does matter (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/_articles/system_does_matter.html) all the same. But the Realms is inviolate behind the 3E prism: you just have to learn how to look, and how to wait.what's the first thing most of us look for in a new book? New feats & prestige classes.Not true of Forgotten Realms fans, who by definition want to know about the Forgotten Realms, or of any us I want anything to do with.
TheLeviathan 04-30-04, 01:57 PM	I picked up the dragonlance book mainly to see what had become of the game world since the fifth age, which is when I stopped following it. I absolutely loved where things have gone, and I've found the source book quite useful. I've also gotten extensive use out of my FR books. I didn't know a thing about forgotten realms until I started collecting the books, because I never bothered to read the novels.
Kuje31 04-30-04, 02:00 PM	Originally posted by Faraer Not true of Forgotten Realms fans, who by definition want to know about the Forgotten Realms, or of any us I want anything to do with. I have to agree with you here. Another player and I both picked up the Player's Guide when it came out. He was asking me all about the feats and classes while I was looking at the cosmology and the fluff changes. I answered, "I have no idea what those classes do nor am I interested in them." His answer to me was, "Well I don't care about the fluff or the changes to the cosmology or the sections about the updates to the time line." Two totally different views, him not being a FR fan and me being one, we both looked at different parts of the book. He likes mechanics and I don't. :) Since I run a mechanics lite game.
Falstaff the Fighter 04-30-04, 02:14 PM	what's the first thing most of us look for in a new book? New feats & prestige classes. I look for interesting background information, adventure hooks, interesting characters, and easily readable maps.
druid berrymore 04-30-04, 02:17 PM	Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- what's the first thing most of us look for in a new book? New feats & prestige classes. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I haven't even looked at the PrCs and feats in most of my books. Of course I don't really represent the average gamer. Aside from the three core rulebooks I only have FR books. I'm a FR fan first, then a D&D fan. I think anyone who is first a FR fan feels cheated now that there is less FR(for the money) in FR. Off topic: Damn! That Shining South cover looks good.
Cunning Linguist 04-30-04, 02:25 PM	I can't say I don't like the cruncy parts.. but I might tend to look at them in a fluff kind of way. When I look at the morninglord of Lathander, I see that he has lots of undead hunting features, so im thinking that one might find one or two of them in Daggerdale, since they are having problems with undeads. I see the Shadow Thief of Amn as being more of a leader and the talketive, charismatic type of theif more then lets say, Thayan Slaver, who is clearly just mean. So when I read up on someone who has Guild Thief, or Shadow Thief, I think.. A kinda like a mafia boss, while when I read up on someone who has levels as a Thayan Slaver, he's a badass henchman, the one that likes to inflict pain.
Metis 04-30-04, 03:00 PM	More than just Hack-and-Slash As important as fighting is to the AD&D game, it isn't the be-all and end-all of play. It's just one way for characters to deal with situations. If characters could do nothing but fight, the game would quickly get boring--every encounter would be the same. The quote is from the 2nd Edition Player's Handbook, which is interesting. I'd say there is nothing I've noticed in the new Player's Handbook that supports that sort of thing. Perhaps that's the problem? A PH full of rules, most which pertain to combat, that doesn't put any sort of focus on the other aspects of the game?
Brahzs M'ahnkei 04-30-04, 03:45 PM	It's nice to see that FR players look at the game from a slightly different angle than than other D&D players. I still say that the basic game mechanics are more geared towards combat than anything else, but's reassuring to hear something different is being done out there. The game is what we make it. ;)
protonik 04-30-04, 11:08 PM	I ignore the Prestige Classes personally as I enjoy the world much more than the twinky bits. Organizational Prestige classes I pay attention to sometimes, to see if they maintain the flavour of the org like the Harper classes I like and the Red Wizard.... Jason
Forsaken_Rocker 05-02-04, 12:49 AM	i have been saying this for a long time but no one seems to get it, the whole reason of dnd is because you can do WHATEVER you want, your own class, campaign, race. I could make the pink flowerd arse dwarves if i wanted. The rules that are put in books and paper are guidlines, hints, easy information, or starters. If i want i can improve a goblins ac from 4 to 55 and say that he is amazingly skilled and has the best frigen armor in the world. I allow anything that makes sense to ME and my players, some people are dumb
WizO_BigSister 05-02-04, 07:34 AM	Forsaken_Rocker has got it right. The reason why D&D and the Realms are so great is that they make allowances for all sorts of players. Every different game has its own balance between numbers and mood, fluff and crunch. We are seeing more numbers in books because that's what some people want. There is nothing wrong with this so long as the background information stuff keeps coming as well.
sidekick 05-02-04, 05:59 PM	Me I like both. Example the PGtF I went straight to the feats and new regional stuff. Why? I just started a new campaign yseterday (got he book five days ago) and wanted to know how these new RULES would impact on my campaign. Hwever, as soon as I had that stuff sorted I went for the cosmology and timeline - which sadly lacked, the cosmology was cool but the time line basically said to me "hey go buy these novels that we publish!", so much else must have happened in the realms, what about the other stuff?. Anyway, I like new rules, if i don't like some of them then I discuss said rules with my group (we're big on democracy, plus we time share Dming). Having said that I also love new history/background info on the realms. The realms is so differnt form the other campaign settings because its so history, culture rich. Its got something for everyone! The more it becomes rules driven the more it becomes like greyhawk/dragonlance. And no disrespect intented, but when I read those settingsthey seem to have no soul, it's just all so stereotypical. [rant over I guess] And back on topic..... Anyway, I agree with the Linguistic master, I like rules and new PrC's but only if they can sensically have a place within the culture/history of the realms. For this reason I've never played Psionics, the Realms doesn;t really support them, don't get me wrong you can have Psionics in the reamls. I've just never seen the need. Anyway, I'm rambling, it';s mondya morning, I'm avoiding work and I need more caffine/sugar. What was this all about again?
Falstaff the Fighter 05-02-04, 08:53 PM	Every different game has its own balance between numbers and mood, fluff and crunch. We are seeing more numbers in books because that's what some people want. What about the other people who don't want this? Why are the some better than the others?
Cunning Linguist 05-02-04, 08:59 PM	Originally posted by Falstaff the Fighter Every different game has its own balance between numbers and mood, fluff and crunch. We are seeing more numbers in books because that's what some people want. What about the other people who don't want this? Why are the some better than the others? The other kind buy more books then the kind that want fluff. The problem lies in that fluff lovers only want some type of fluff. (take me, I would not want to buy a book about Harpers and Elves, while other might not want to buy a book about Zhentarim and Fey'ri) While the chrunchy lovers buys almost everything, but not fluff.
Gemstone 05-03-04, 03:45 AM	I just dropped in because I heard someone say that DnD is complex.... Don't get me wrong, but D&D is the least comlex game I ever played. Our group play the game and love it since it's so simple and anyone can learn the game. Okay, I know that many of you out there (reading this) are Americans/non-swedish and hence, haven't played games like Eon or Drakar och Demoner, were it takes over one hour just to create a character! (And it's basicly the same stuff you need to do, skill points, class, feats, etc.). Also, what is it that I hear about "no-roleplaying" (:P) in DnD? We roleplay all the time when we play. One character have even gone so far that his background is twisting and the character doesn't know if his father was killed by humans or a beast. It's all about how you wish to play. If you want to fight, then fight. If you want to roleplay, then roleplay and hand out EXP for good roleplaying. These rules are not etched on stone tables. They are rather more like ideas and suggestion how the game should be run. - Tri-Stat DX (players handbook). Oh and by the way: This is not a flame or a post to provke. It's my personal opinion about the DnD game. Hence the smileys ^_^
Ramius_Mordale 05-03-04, 10:31 AM	*Chuckles* Funny someone said D&D is complex. Got another system to add to Gemstone's list. Rifts. Talk about more unbalancing and confusing system ever created. You got your O.C.C.'s, your R.C.C.'s and then your super buff Cosmo-Knights. (Don't know what that is, well just imagine being able to fly faster than the speed of light through space and you can fly through the center of a Sun and not take damage.) If you have ever played it raise your hands. :P If you haven't its probably best, it takes forever, at least for my group, to get the energy to even create a character for Rifts and by the time we get enough interest in it the campaigns....well lets just say by the time we get to playing, no one wants to play. (Cause there is just so many damn choices is mind boggling.) Anyways, I disagree that D&D for at least 3.5 doesn't have any rping material in it. Especially if you buy the source books for the realms. Even if the regional books don't have very good PrC's, feats, or more powerful items, they still enrich the region more by giving you an idea how the peoples interact towards one another and their culture. One thing rping does is exercise your imagination to greater heights then you once thought. I know that when I look back on my past characters I think 'Wow, that guy has no personality what-so-ever and now I look at my current ones and feel happy that they are intriguing characters that I will remember for years and years to come. It's just like anything, if you keep practicing and focusing your skill, the better you become at it. I want to just part with this then I'm done. Whenever I play the game I like to think that I'm an actor trying to accurately display this character I'm playing. From what he likes to eat, to what he thinks about the world around him, to whom he cares the most for. Its not necessarily, just the base emotion of they are aloof and arrogant, being your typical elf. Whatcha got to do is make the character your own and breath life into them to make them memorable characters. Eh, I'm done, I've talked too long as it is. LOL I think I need to learn to type shorter posts. :P Good journeys all.:)
Faraer 05-03-04, 11:24 AM	Someone would be me. Of course D&D is a complex game compared to (1) what most people are used to, (2) the minimum required to resolve situations in play, and (3) a majority of published RPGs. Citing games more complex than D&D doesn't indicate otherwise (I could name scores that are simpler).
Cunning Linguist 05-03-04, 12:04 PM	For complex games: Give 2.ed a try, or even better Hackmaster..
Faraer 05-03-04, 12:19 PM	2nd edition AD&D is in some ways harder to learn than 3E, but I think feats, combat manoeuvres, skills, and the modifiers system make 3E more complex overall. But I acknowledge that's arguable (not here, I think). Hackmaster is an interesting one to raise; it was specifically designed to appeal to existing/lapsed AD&D players and also plays to the rules-for-rules'-sake mentality. (Also interesting in terms of the 'Chinese whispers' oral dissemination of what D&D was that happened pre-widespread-Internet; for a system that claims to hearken back to 1st edition AD&D, a lot of its design principles are foreign to that game's intent, many of them indeed from 2nd edition.)
tauster 05-03-04, 02:00 PM	Originally posted by Cunning Linguist The other kind buy more books then the kind that want fluff. The problem lies in that fluff lovers only want some type of fluff. (take me, I would not want to buy a book about Harpers and Elves, while other might not want to buy a book about Zhentarim and Fey'ri) While the chrunchy lovers buys almost everything, but not fluff. i think Cunning Linguist hit the nail on the head. thatīs the most important reason why thereīs the tendency towards crunch and away from fluff. another reason (or another way to look at the problem, if you like) is that realmslore is only interesting to realms-fans; dragonlancers, greyhawks or planewalkers will probably not buy it, whereas crunchbooks have the tendency to be bought by everyone (or at least enough people from every genre that the total number of buyers is higher than the average number of buying realmsians. questions whether dnd is more or less complex than other game-mechanics or 2nd edition (which works fine for our group, btw :cool: ) is off-topic and should (if at all) be discussed in a different thread. tauster
Kuje31 05-03-04, 02:00 PM	Originally posted by Cunning Linguist For complex games: Give 2.ed a try, or even better Hackmaster.. Happens to think 3/3.5 is more complex then 2e ever was. :) My opinion
Faraer 05-03-04, 02:17 PM	The complexity of the new D&D and how that relates to the setting of the Realms and to other rulesets associated with the Realms is obviously not off-topic in a discussion of how the Realms is being published, especially given that the Realms' creator has said he doesn't like reading or writing 3E stat blocks.
tauster 05-03-04, 03:16 PM	Originally posted by Faraer The complexity of the new D&D and how that relates to the setting of the Realms and to other rulesets associated with the Realms is obviously not off-topic in a discussion of how the Realms is being published, especially given that the Realms' creator has said he doesn't like reading or writing 3E stat blocks. sorry if i offended. i thought wayward-sage meant in itīs initial posting the transition of the realms-publications from being story-centered to being rules-centered, so i assumed that comparisons with other (not-dnd-)games are as off-topic as are comparisons between 2e and 3e. i still think the former comparison is ot, while i was wrong obviously with on the latter. Originally posted by wayward_sage With the change over from 2nd ed to 3rd ed I've noticed alot of change in Forgotten Realms. Alot of it has to do with much of the books being jam packed with rules and not much story or history info. Yes, its there. But it seems that 3rd ed. overall has made a massive turn toward being rule heavy and power gamming and less story.
Forsaken_Rocker 05-03-04, 05:04 PM	I think that the books are basically information that helps you understand faerun more, and you can alter these as much as you want
Brahzs M'ahnkei 05-03-04, 06:16 PM	Originally posted by WizO_BigSister The reason why D&D and the Realms are so great is that they make allowances for all sorts of players. Every different game has its own balance between numbers and mood, fluff and crunch. We are seeing more numbers in books because that's what some people want. There is nothing wrong with this so long as the background information stuff keeps coming as well. I agree that as long as Wizards keeps the flavortext coming to give players the _option_ to roleplay, which they have so far. I think, however, that wayward_sage made a really good point: Originally posted by wayward_sage ...But this also comes back to what makes DnD cool yet hard to get new people interested in. Its complicated, lets not forget to mention that on top of the rules, you've got to learn about the world of forgotten realms. The game is so difficult sometimes that I make mistakes constantly. Miscalculating hit dice, encumbrance, AC... I have been playing 3/3.5 for over a year now... I started playing 1st & 2nd edition in the 80's... I can't even begin to remember/ fathom the incredible amound of modifiers, charts, tables, etc. that go into this game. I am a teacher by trade, and I have never come across anything with a learning curve like this. As I sit here and type this post, I am astounded by this fact. I can think of only a small handful of professions (how many of us are paid to do this? :P) that require this amount of learning and relearning. Having said all that, I also know that it is a labor of love. The fact that I (we) have taken the time and energy to _have_ this discussion is proof enough of that. Originally posted by wayward_sage ...But you know what? Why does it matter? Its about having fun with your friends, telling great stories and creating memorable characters. This, to me, says it all. ;) BTW- In my humble opinion, I think that Hackmaster is an unfair comparison to 3/3.5 in this discussion. It was always my impression (granted, I've never played the game) that it was created almost as a statement: the ultimate, if ridiculous, extrapolation of the rules-heavy 2nd edition AD&D. That is all. ;)
Cunning Linguist 05-03-04, 06:39 PM	BTW- In my humble opinion, I think that Hackmaster is an unfair comparison to 3/3.5 in this discussion. It was always my impression (granted, I've never played the game) that it was created almost as a statement: the ultimate, if ridiculous, extrapolation of the rules-heavy 2nd edition AD&D. Well, Kenzo wanted to get Hackmaster of the ground for a long time, but they never got the licence from TSR. But when Wizard got the licence, and they did not want to use it any more, they could sell it to Kenzo. Now, Kenzo wanted to make a game, that was on one side, a powergamers dream, but on the other hand, a powergamers hell. The game lets you tweak your character into oblivion, but for every power, you gain a absurd weakness. For every situation, there is a rule, and most of them go against the players. Hackmaster, if played right, is the hardest game out there. If you have a 3 level party, and you roll a 00 on the random encounter table, you WILL get a Red Great Wyvern, no cutbacks. On the other hand, if your DM rolls you a +4 fullplate, you will get it, no matter what level you are on. Hackmaster (played right) is not roleplay, and its not rollplay. It's Ruleplay.
Ramius_Mordale 05-04-04, 01:02 AM	Eh, I apologize if I sounded a bit rude to people's feelings. I personally have played it so much I forgot how complicated it can be, I have the tendency to have a huge ego after all. :P Anyways, off topic a bit, LOL I love Hackmasters covers with that adventure party. Every book they published another one of the members died a horrible death. ROFL. :D Back on subject now, yeah I suppose they like producing rules more genric so they can appeal to all settings not just solely the realms. But for awhile at least they seemed to focus greatly on the Realms until Eberron was put into the works. Now it seems they are more focused on that project. Hence is the reason why more general stuff is probably being published right now instead of just solely Realms goodies. Disappointed I am, but eh, whatcha gonna do? But I agree with Cunning Linguist that 2nd edition and Hackmaster are pretty complicated. Faraer sorry if I offended you, not my intent which I probably should have chosen a better way to word it. Welp, thats all I got to say for now. Adios.
Brahzs M'ahnkei 05-04-04, 09:13 AM	Originally posted by Cunning Linguist Hackmaster (played right) is not roleplay, and its not rollplay. It's Ruleplay. Very well said. I thank my lucky 10-sider D&D/FR has not progressed to this level. Originally posted by Ramius_Mordale Anyways, off topic a bit, LOL I love Hackmasters covers with that adventure party. Every book they published another one of the members died a horrible death. ROFL. :D The covers that I have seen are remakes of the original 1st ed. D&D manuals. Only... more so. ;)