When 3e game out, I had mixed feelings. I was (and still am) overjoyed to see d&d regain the popularity that it had a decade before, but at the same time, I was very disappointed in how the rules changed. Some rules were (to me) actually great ideas, others had been in the 2e DMG as optional rules but were made default, and others I just did not like. I'm sure everyone had some mix of this as well (some likes, some neutral feelings, some dislike).
Now 4e is coming out, and I'm thinking to how I run my games, and what it seems 4e is turning out to be (I am doing what I can to reserve any real judgment on it until its out).
There are a lot of 1e/2e rules that I still use in my games, and unless 4e comes up with something out of the blue I don't see myself changing. I'm just curious (after that long setup) how many of you still either run 2e, or use 2e rules in your games.
For example, I still use
+initiative system from 2e (weapon speed, casting time, etc).
+old alignment system (good/evil are relative, not absolute). A pickpocket is evil (very faint), a mugger is moderate, murderer strong, etc.
+druid shape shifting (normal natural animals only)
+no metamagic
+no magic shops
But things I took from 3.x
+saving throws (just simpler)
+bonus stat every 4 levels (though I HR that you can only pump a stat to your racial max+1, if you have a 19 STR as a human, you have to pump a different stat)
Things that didn't matter (optional rules in 2e anyway)
+never ran level caps
+never ran racial class restrictions
+thaco/Bab/AC rules.... they are the exact same thing
Just wondering (after that long post), did most of you drop 1/2e entirely when 3e came out, and do you plan to drop 3e for 4e, or did you take what you liked and just played the game your own way? Do any of you still use any of the older rules? This is more targeted to those of you who were weaned in the gygax days, versus those that started off in 3.x.
- Aside from #Att & movement rate, 1e had no definition whatsoever regarding what you can do when it's your turn to act (and the combat round was too long to make sense). 2e broke it down into too mane pieces. in 3.Xe things are just to restrictive to be realistic. I tried to make things as realistic as possible with my alternative combat-movement approach and I believe it actually restores some balance between spellcasting and non-spellcasting actions.
- Initiative: It is both time saving and way more realistic to check initiative when the encounter begins and cycle from then on. The order of operation changes when someone decides to postpone his actions waiting to Re-act to someone else's actions.
- Weapon speed should determine #Att and not initiative. There's no reason why someone wielding a dagger would have quicker instincts to dive into battle earlier than someone wielding a longsword.
- Animal companions and special mounts: plucking an intelligent slave as class feature - man that's a stupid concept.
- Some game options are missing (e.g. pulling punches, shielding another, readying a Coup-de-Grace for making a bargain or a classic hostage situation – I have suggestions for these as well).
- Russian roulette syndrome regarding character HP – especially in the lower levels.
- Ability scores are not attributed in areas they should and are attributed in areas they shouldn't (see my take on ability redistribution).
- Too much clunky mechanics (made so many changes to remedy this one).
- Classes: too much to say to fit into a note. Just look at my take on classes.
There's so much more to add, but these are the really major issues.
And regarding your the issues you brought up:
- Isolated from reality, actions are not aligned. To align actions you should judge them according to their context within the situation.
- In the world of 3e a unicorn is just another life form, so restricting shapeshifting to "normal" animals makes no sense. I believe my approach regarding shapeshifting prevents the usual power abuse.
- "Magic shops" is definitely on the top-10 list of 3e worst calls.
I play in others' 3e games, and it's too much of the new stuff to my taste, but the DMs are good, so there it is.
I and my gaming group dumped 2e completely when we started to play 3e. Certainly I run some house rules that I feel make the game a little more playable, and the people I game with also have some house rules in the games they run (many of the house rules are common between games). However, no changes were made with the idea of "making it more like 2e".
When 4e comes out, I and my friends are planning on buying the books and playing. I imagine I'll end up doing the same thing with 4e that I did with 3e, drop the old rules and use the new ones and, after some playtesting, modify/add house rules where I think they make sense (if any are needed at all).
One note, in response the the dislike of magic shops in 3e, I don't dislike the idea that someone could travel to a city and purchase some magic items. Where I think the problem lies is that people assume that a magic shop = any and every magic item is available for sale all the time, be it in this city or the next. IMO magic shops aren't the problem, unlimited/unrestricted magic shops are, however, something to be careful of adding to a game.
Exactly. I don't have a problem with magic shops. The city wealth tables in the DMG will determine the most expensive items you will find in the city. I also don't like unlimited magic shops. It makes for too much metagaming when you've got players searching through the DMG and MIC to find the exact item that they need to put together the OMGROXXORSL33T!!! build they've been working on. I make my PCs do a knowledge arcana/religion or a general intelligence check to see if their character even thought of something like that item.
Another option would be to have the characters go to a magic shop and talk to the owner, detailing the need they have and if any item will fill the bill. The owner tells them to come back in a couple of weeks while he asks his contacts about it. When they come back, assuming you will allow the item in the campaign, it is either available for sale or could be made by commission by another mage. This would make the item cost a little more, research fee or something like that, but it works. This also makes a good springboard for short adventures as the party needs to find an item to trade for the one they want because the owner/maker wants one and can't find one themself.
I make my PCs do a knowledge arcana/religion or a general intelligence check to see if their character even thought of something like that item.
Personally, I find this a little silly. The PCs shouldn't have to roll a check to see if they considered buying an item. The shopkeeper's primary job is to be a salesperson, else he wouldn't have much of a shop. Thus, he would obviously show the PC any and all items he has that he thinks could be useful to the PC.
I mean, the shopkeeper is going to make this as easy as possible for the PC, he wants that PC to drop 5,000g on the counter and walk out with something.
And as for the initiative, I do agree that it's not perfect, but it's no worse than the 3e method (IMO). The 3e method is faster, but it takes away some of the dynamics in battle. In 2e, if you roll once per side, it only adds two die rolls per round, so it doesn't add that much time to battles. There are plenty (lost count) of threads on those arguements, but that is how I play it.
As for "unicorn" being normal or not, it depends on the setting. I've always had unicorns being inately magical (i.e. not natural) creatures, so they wouldn't be on the list. If in your campaign they are just horses w/ horns, then sure, it's an ok change. Any creature native to the world that is a "natural" (non magical) animal would be valid. For example, when i play darksun, the list is quite different (completely different fauna in that campaign). It's easy enough to ask "is that a valid target" to change to.
Oh, another rule that I took from 3.x that I forgot was spontaneous casting (for clerics). It was something that worked for me, to allow spontanious casting of healing spells.
Just wondering (after that long post), did most of you drop 1/2e entirely when 3e came out, and do you plan to drop 3e for 4e, or did you take what you liked and just played the game your own way? Do any of you still use any of the older rules? This is more targeted to those of you who were weaned in the gygax days, versus those that started off in 3.x.
I started back in the olden days when Elf, Dwarf, and Halfling were classes. The ridiculous restrictions and clumsiness of earlier D&D editions is what drove me away from D&D once I learned of a different system (name withheld), but 3rd brought me back and I don't use a darn thing from 'em.
I started back in the olden days when Elf, Dwarf, and Halfling were classes. The ridiculous restrictions and clumsiness of earlier D&D editions is what drove me away from D&D once I learned of a different system (name withheld), but 3rd brought me back and I don't use a darn thing from 'em.
I remember that, the old boxed sets.
I still use a lot of the old adventures and ones from Dungeon, First and Second Edition. It doesn't take that much work to update, usually just using new monster stats or the new skills in place of the earlier system.
Wilderness Survival Guide (no similar book since has measured up)
No dwarf wizards!
Things I kept from 2E:
Ranger specialization (but only in bows)
School Specialization rules
Player's Option grappling maneuvers
Things Added in 3E I dropped:
Dwarven Wizards
Eschew Materials Feat
Favored Classes
Things I've wanted to keep using, but never got around to hammering out the details:
Casting time
Weapon speed
Specialty Priests
Spell-casting monks
10 minutes per level to memorize spells (nerfs wizards too much in comparison to sorcerers.)
Comeliness
Demi-human multiclassing (being able to gestalt without ruining balance)
2e Skeletons and Zombies have no alignment.
I tried making a Rogue skill system where Rogues could use skills differently to other characters - for xample Hide in Saadows - A rogue can count an area of shadow for a hide check and stuff like that - the principal is the same as with Rangers using survival to track and Rogues using search to find traps.
1E Paladins emit Protection from Evil 10ft radius at all times.
Dungeoneers/wilderness survival Guides are pretty unique and cool, probably wouldn't sell much nowadays since they add little to character power.
Fighters become Lords at 9th level and attract a small army if they build a fort. Rogues attract a gang. Barbarians can call a horde.
1E Battlesystem. The only mass combat system for D&D that really rocked, remarkably consistent considering how inconsistent the main rules were! Really handy for making large numbers of low level stuff scary - both as enemies and as followers.
1E - 2E Fireballs are 33,000 cubic feet- watch out before using them in a small room!
OD&D- 2E Not using miniatures as the default.
Old Initiative.
3E The D20 system. That was really needed I think.
2e Paladin's detect evil intent rather than Evil Alignment but d20'd to a +20 Sense motive vs any intention to do Evil (so not vs feints and stuff like that) and also functions normally vs supernatural Evil (undead and Demons).
Forgot about that, I still use evil intent. I like your +20 sense motive even better though.
It should be handled a different way in 3e or 4e, but if someone were to offer to run a 1e or 2e campaign for me, I'd be excited to play that sort of character.
(You forgot Basic! I like that halflings were especially good at initiative, +1 on a d6 roll! Magic missiles that dealt 1d6+1 were pretty nifty too.)
Magic items aren't indestructable. A magic sword can break and a cloak can be tattered. If it happens, the item loses its power. They have to be taken care of.
Mages don't make magic items without a reason. There aren't a million cloaks of hiding laying around. A couple mages made them for special servants... so any cloaks of hiding are being used.
Since I still play 3.5 and i see nothing wrong with 3.5 I do not plan on switching over to 4.X At least not any time soon. If all of my players decide that they want to change, then i will make that decision at that time. Honestly more than likely I don't see my players changin over. If you add up the retail value of my books, I have about $300 in books, and have the small collection. Most people in my group do not want to update their library anytime soon.
I personally think a lot of the rules were made easier by 3e, such as saving throws and the standard d20+modifier hope for high numbers (almost a verbatim quote from a post above), but even as a new gamer I recognize the superiority of some of the older rules.
Since so many PCs are able to detect evil, magic, undead, etc all the time, if those abilities are kept in 4th, I'd like to see a standard notation on maps for what areas have those elements so that DMs won't need to flip back and forth to check out what's in every room before PCs decide to enter them.
(The Sunsword in Expedition to Castle Ravenloft flares with light whenever it's close to undead. I had to stop the game and note every crypt that had undead in it.)
Sure, Eberron is cool in a Star Wars kind of way, but every time I (once again) start playing Baldur's Gate, I'm somewhat disapointed that 3rd Ed. got away from that style shortly after the first release.
I want armor to be practical with the really good ones far to expensive for normal armorsmiths to produce on stock. When you want a suit of heavy armor, you've to go to the next large city or to the dwarves, which can be quite a journey, depending on our current location, and then it will probably take a couple of weeks until it's finished. And if you want to get full plate, well... good luck. Maybe some dwarven kings can have them made in their personal armories.
Cities are few, humans live in human town, elves live in elven towns, and real cities with more than 5000 people are few. Even nobles wear simple tunics and not gowns that look like early 19th century. Or later.
As the gp limit for a large town is 3000 gp, you won't find any magic shops in them, as the coolest stuff in that range are boots of elvenkind, fog horns, and stones of alarm. And even with 15,000 gp limit in small cities, you don't come much further than boots of speed and +2 weapons. Not completely sure, but I think my setting has only about a dozen large cities on a continent of a size bigger than all europe.
Currently, I'm working on an alchemy system, that allows the creation of elexirs with effects that don't copy spells.
And I don't use miniatures anymore. Simply stating "the goblins crowd in the doorway" or "I step in front of our wizard" is usually enough to determine attacks of opportunity for movement.
"Two orcs step protectively before the shaman" is all you need to determine, that you can't bull rush him unless the DM says they are going away.
I do allow any class for all races, but there are still "associated classes" for each race and members of other classes are considered weired by their kin and usually shunned.
It makes a big difference.
(Except the single-mindedly destructive neutral enemies. What a cheat they are!)
I'm kinda a jerk though, I let clerics turn Teiflings. (:
Just wondering (after that long post), did most of you drop 1/2e entirely when 3e came out, and do you plan to drop 3e for 4e, or did you take what you liked and just played the game your own way? Do any of you still use any of the older rules? This is more targeted to those of you who were weaned in the gygax days, versus those that started off in 3.x.
As an oldtimer who started playing with the boxed set before graduating to AD&D 1e and so forth ... I dropped 2e when the long-overdue 3e came out. It helps to have a third-party fansite (previously "Eric Noah's Third Edition D&D News Site," now "EN World under new webmaster) to see what the new mechanics are and I liked it.
Can't say I'm ready for 4e because I'm still playing and loving 3e at the moment. Ask me in 2010. The only thing I keep from previous editions are the fluff.
If some of the people I play with couldn't, say, walk in and buy an Everlasting Peanut or and Everdamp Sponge they would be pretty upset. In order for them to buy such an item in 3.x as written I have to do a lot of math to calculate how said item was created and its precise value. I suck at math. So I just guestimate and approximate.
One of the things I do not like about 3.x is how slavishly people want to adhere to the RAW on magic items. They shouldn't be flipping pages in a book to see what few items someone else has already made might round out their character, they should be using their imaginations and creating a magic item. While I like the fact that there are rules to allow people to do that in 3.x, I hate the fact that those rules are in a system that seems to make people loath to do so.
One of the things I do not like about 3.x is how slavishly people want to adhere to the RAW on magic items. They shouldn't be flipping pages in a book to see what few items someone else has already made might round out their character, they should be using their imaginations and creating a magic item. While I like the fact that there are rules to allow people to do that in 3.x, I hate the fact that those rules are in a system that seems to make people loath to do so.
Can't be helped. In 3e, the magic item system is much more codified than in previous editions, perhaps for balanced purpose, so that DM don't hand artifact-like prizes like cookies.
Just wondering (after that long post), did most of you drop 1/2e entirely when 3e came out, and do you plan to drop 3e for 4e, or did you take what you liked and just played the game your own way? Do any of you still use any of the older rules? This is more targeted to those of you who were weaned in the gygax days, versus those that started off in 3.x.
My group and I had settled on AD&D using a modified version of the players option serries (now often called 2.5) after awile. When 3.0 came out we looked at it, didn't think it was enough of an improvment to switch over, so we kept playing as-is for many more years.
I only switched to 3.5 about 1 1/2 years ago... and only becuase I moved 3k miles away from my friends and gamming circle, and could not find anyone in my new home that played old style D&D.
There are some things about 3.5 I like... Saving throws, skill system, open multi classing, even exp table. However other things I don't like... the more standerdized magic system and magic items, changes in style, (or what is now called 'fluff') and some combat rules.
I have not tried to alter 3.5 with any rules from previous edditions... becuase I think the new rules are so differant that the rules just don't mesh well.
I do miss my old 2.5 games tho. The style of play we used to enjoy with those games has been impossable for me to find to find with the new 3.5 players I have meet. I have yet to figure out if that is becuase the new system has changed the way people play... of if it's just becuase the group I used to play with was differant then most.
I do miss my old 2.5 games tho. The style of play we used to enjoy with those games has been impossable for me to find to find with the new 3.5 players I have meet. I have yet to figure out if that is becuase the new system has changed the way people play... of if it's just becuase the group I used to play with was differant then most.
I totally agree! My friends and I all continue to play both 1st and 2nd Edition! Old School all the way. If you ask me once they started coming out with 3rd edition and above the game changed in ways that lose the main reason for enjoying the game. The game began to get so hung up in rules and options it left out the real fun of roleplaying and the ability of the GM to create the playing field. Our current GM is the best I have had ever. He is a great story teller. It takes a great story teller to make an awsome campaign. Our last campaign lasted for 6 full years of real time before we retired our characters. My Cleric to Thor was 22nd level and had the befriended Thor (helps when you convert entire continent of people to Thor in 1 day...but that is another story) to the point that on a rare day I could summon the Rainbow Bridge to our service. That was entirely 1st Edition.
We started yet another adventure also at 1st Edition. I am hoping for yet another 6yrs of Awesome gaming.
Check this site out for possible old style gamers in your area.
http://dnd.meetup.com/
Our group is not on this list as we know each other from collage and have stayed together since. But if I had to move out of town for work I would try using this web site.
I really liked my old 1E games, mainly because it was my first gaming experience of any kind. The original system was limited, and we heavily house ruled it, but we had a great time. I played 2E, and while I thought it was OK, I wasn't that thrilled with it. I've beeen RPGing since 1983, but I only played D&D for about 4 years total from 1983 until 3rd edition came out.
I really like 3rd edition. Sure there are some things that I miss from the older editions, but on the whole, I though it was a great improvement and have been playing it ever since.
I'm a lot older now, and have less and less time to game any more, so I don't kno whether I'll bother switching to 4E when it comes out.
THAC0s a non issue - OD&D and 1E had tables and some players figured out the maths behind it and called it THAC0- the guy researching 2e decided to go with what players were using. Remember when 2E came out 1E was still going strong so they made small changes but when 3E came out the game was going badly so they made more sweeping changes to bring in new blood.
Actually I've been looking at the original game - the brown box from 1974 and stuff - it was way way easier than 3E and would be kind of liberating to play in many ways. If 3E was Magic, then OD&D would be poker - in one you build your hand, and the more stuff you've bought, the more options you have, and in the other, you take the hand you're dealt and play the best you can with it. The basic concept was different too - your hobbit was different from other hobbits because it was YOU as a hobbit, whereas from 2e on it was about the character as a seperate entity.
They said 4e was going to be simpler than 3e, but in many ways it looks more complicated, with bloodied, and healing surges and loads more stuff to keep track of than any previous edition.
One of the first things I did in 3.5 was axe Magic Item shops. The MIC has a drawing of two adventurers trying out magic boots at what must be a medieval Footlocker. Cracks me up to no end. I get items to my players using other means (like through adventuring perhaps?) than the corner store.
I use the old facing rules in combat. Because it bugs me that shields in 3.5 protected you on all sides at once. The animal morale rules from the Wilderness Survival Guide are also handy (any excuse to use a d12). I tried importing that book's outdoor survival system, but it didn't work out too well.
I've also run several of the old modules that are easy to update to 3.5.
Initiative speed modifiers? Absolutly horrible to add in all that junk to a clean and smoothed out system that works nicely.
well, jsut my 2 cents.