You know that OD&D is sooo much better than 3E when …
You convert your OD&D characters to 3E, and realize they are so powerful you have to retire them after playing for about 20 minutes.
Your character achieves 3rd level, and you realize that character levels 1-3 just aren’t as big a deal as they used to be.
Your players complain alignments are too confusing and you remember the good old days when Lawful and Chaotic actually meant good guys and bad guys.
Your dungeon master tells you to reroll all your ability scores because they are too low and your character will die too quickly. You remember that in OD&D, even if your highest ability score was 9, you would still be able to get to at least level 25.
It takes about 2 hours of gameplay to defeat the great wyrm in about 60 seconds of game time, you remember that in OD&D you would have whipped its sorry ass in 5 mins gameplay – absolute max.
After running the same 3E campaign for 1 year your players are level 14, you remember in OD&D they would have been level 36 by now. After running the campaign for 2 years, they’re about level 21, where in OD&D they would have ascended the ranks of the immortals and basically be the most powerful beings in the multiverse.
have fun with this thread ... !!!
Originally posted by OD&D fan
After running the same 3E campaign for 1 year your players are level 14, you remember in OD&D they would have been level 36 by now. After running the campaign for 2 years, they’re about level 21, where in OD&D they would have ascended the ranks of the immortals and basically be the most powerful beings in the multiverse.
Methinks you have your editions reversed. I've run 4 year long 1st ed games where the PC's had just reached level 11, while my 3rd ed games and gamers are upset if they don't level every session...
He isn't talking about OAD&D, he is talking about OD&D (B/X).
You switch to 3E, and months later end up asking yourself why you're not having fun gaming anymore.
You switch to 3E and realize that your characters are immortal from the very start.
As a DM you write a game in 3E and realize you just spent 72 hours of real time just to create three NPC characters.
You realize you can't locate an obscure note in the DMG because your fluorsecent yellow marker that you use to outline such things just drips off the overpriced, shiny, slick pages of the 3E DMG.
You can't tell the difference between your androgynous, half-demigod/half-dragon, monk/magic-user/thief/assassin, half-elven/half-dwarven character with the utility belt full of artifacts and your buddy's androgynous, half-demigod/half-dragon, monk/magic-user/thief/assassin, half-elven/half-dwarven character with the utility belt full of artifacts.
Originally posted by Yorlum
You realize that your fresh-rolled 3rd edder has taken you longer to CREATE than some of your 1st edders LIVED.
Bingo! Amen! Kudos! Ditto!
R.A.
You realize that you can actually use all of the skills that a normal human could use.
You realize that your first level fighter doesn't have to be acarbon copy of most other first level fighters on the planet.
You don't have to color your dice with a crayon to use them straight out of the box. ;)
You find out that your first level cleric gets to actually cast a spell (and isn't a carbon copy of every other first level cleric).
You find out that Lawful means Lawful, Chaotic means Chaotic, and good/evil actually mean good/evil.
You find out that your characters are not immortal from the very start.
(This one is entirely campaign specific, so doesn't really have any bearing on edition 
)You realize that your elf can be a cleric if he wants, or even just a straight fighter.
You find out that demihumans don't start gaining letters instead of levels to make up for them being too powerful at early levels.
You find out that your cleric gets cool 9th level spells just like the magic-user always got.
You find out you can make a rogue instead of a thief.
You find out that the DM no longer has to kill the entire party off because his guesswork about the relative strength of a monster versus your characters was wrong.
You realize that its the game that is getting support and will thus have new products available, instead of running the same old modules. :D
Originally posted by James McMurray
You know 3E is better than OD&D when:
You realize that you can actually use all of the skills that a normal human could use.
Of course, us 1st edders used those skills without needing a stat and rank to tell us we had them.
You realize that your first level fighter doesn't have to be acarbon copy of most other first level fighters on the planet.
Of course us 1st edders were able to make our characters different in style and personality, rather than just chrome.
You don't have to color your dice with a crayon to use them straight out of the box. ;)
OK, Ya got me there!
You find out that your first level cleric gets to actually cast a spell (and isn't a carbon copy of every other first level cleric).
See above
You find out that Lawful means Lawful, Chaotic means Chaotic, and good/evil actually mean good/evil.
Of course just what Lawful. Chaotic, Good, and Evil ARE are still argued...
You realize that your elf can be a cleric if he wants, or even just a straight fighter.
Of course us 1st edders actually played humans from time to time, rather than powergaming through non-human races
You find out that demihumans don't start gaining letters instead of levels to make up for them being too powerful at early levels.
See above
You find out you can make a rogue instead of a thief.
Of course, us 1st edders got to make Thieves, instead of rogues... And furthermore, we fought demons and devils, not Batzus and Tanrus or whatever they callz um now.
You find out that the DM no longer has to kill the entire party off because his guesswork about the relative strength of a monster versus your characters was wrong.
Sounds like you needed a better DM, not a different ed.
You realize that its the game that is getting support and will thus have new products available, instead of running the same old modules. :D
Definitely need a better DM. Any 1st edder DM worth the title can create and run a game that's a dozen times better than the published material from any edition, simply because it is THEIRS, and they understand it at an authorical level.
My condolences on your bad experiences with the 1st ed.
You realize that every "feat" you pick in 3E is nothing more than a video game maneuver.
You realize that characters iin 3E play like a video game because of unlimited resurrections. Just hit that reset button!
You get sick of the power escalation where every damned spell has a "Mass" or "Greater" version of the original spell.
You tire of being DM because the players have nearly unlimited access to healing, thus making them a constantly regenerating source.
You realize that the campaign ended before you got a chance to savor it due to the excessively fast leveling inherent in 3E.
You realize that everything you can do in 3E, you could do in earlier editions, only you didn't need to pay $24.95 to have every optional decision spelled out for you.
You realize that you've fallen for WOTC's slick marketing skills and are now nothing more than a slave to WOTC's never-ending accessory releases.
You remember there was a time when gods killed characters, instead of characters killing gods.
You remember when dragons could actually threaten a party.
You realize the absurdity of being able to vorpal off someone's head with a beer mug in 3E.
You realize you need a Cray Supercomputer to keep track of all the math involved in 3E.
You realize that a glut of half-literate lackwits have now flooded the market with drivel due to the open gaming license/d20 system.
You realize that most gaming material for 3E, adjusted for inflation, costs more than similar materials in OD&D and AD&D. You used to get more pages for less money, adjusted for inflation.
You realize that divine intervention is no longer needed since most PCs are demi-gods by 6th level anyway!
You realize that as DM, you've become nothing more than the person playing the NPCs, because all the power has been taken out of the DM's hands.
You tire of interrupting the game a hundred times so that the DM can look up a rule. In OOP editions, the DM was allowed to use his own brain instead of adhering to the books verbatim.
You realize that Dragon Magazine looks more like a video/console game mage than an RPG mag.
You feel more like a Marvel Superhero than a fantasy hero.
You realize that combat is impossible if you don't have miniatures, a graph map, and perhaps an accountant to handle all the math involved.
Resurrection is no more common in either.
Players have access to healing as defined by the DM.
Accessories for all three editions are churned out faster than people can buy them, first by TSR, now by WotC and 3rd parties.
Neither edition is math intensive enough to require more than a simple calculator with +, -, x, and / keys.
All editions have had third party material made by lackwits, the only difference now is that the 3rd party sources say D20 instead of "Compatible with Dungeons and Dragon".
Combat is aided by a battlemat in both editions, but neither requires it. Indeed, neither edition requires more than a pen, paper, some dice, and a room big enough to squeeze the players into (or an internet connection to play over).
You know that 3E is better than 1e/OD&D when you realize that:
Parties can no longer sudbue dragons and make them their *****es.
You can get better milage out of your spellcaster's modus operandi by upgrading to greater and mass version of spells that would have become obsolete in older editions.
You realize that you no longer have to rely on the DMs decision making skills for things as basic as "how do I swim" or "can I dodge the pit trap"
You remember a time when players roamed through the Deities and Demigods on a shopping and hunting excursion, and know that if they tried it now most gods' ability to say "you die now mortal" would ruin their day faster than you can say "there were no gods way back when, only immortals."
You realize that unlike OD&D you can play from level 1-36 with 4 books, rather than having to buy 5 boxed sets.
You remember when it used to take 4 rounds to knock a dragon out, and another 2 days to sell him in town.
You realize that most gaming material, although more expensive, is also alot more comprehensive.
You know that someone has little experience with 3E when they claim that:
6th level characters are demigods.
Feats are video game maneuvers.
Dragons are weak.
Gods are easy.
The DM has no control over his game.
Miniatures are necessary.
You realize that a list of jokes has become a flame war when:
I call you a poopy-head. ;)
You know that 3E is better than OD&D when:
As part of a time-travel adventure you convert the entire party over to OD&D and after half a session the players are begging you to let them find the portal home.
Originally posted by James McMurray
[i] You realize that unlike OD&D you can play from level 1-36 with 4 books, rather than having to buy 5 boxed sets.
The Rules Cyclopedia was one book. And it had optional rules for skills, 36-level progression for nonhumans, etc.
I really liked the idea of a single hard back book with ALL the necessary rules in it.
You realize that you can actually use all of the skills that a normal human could use.
You realize that your first level fighter doesn't have to be acarbon copy of most other first level fighters on the planet.
You don't have to color your dice with a crayon to use them straight out of the box.
You find out that your first level cleric gets to actually cast a spell (and isn't a carbon copy of every other first level cleric).
You find out that Lawful means Lawful, Chaotic means Chaotic, and good/evil actually mean good/evil.
You find out that your characters are not immortal from the very start. (This one is entirely campaign specific, so doesn't really have any bearing on edition )
You realize that your elf can be a cleric if he wants, or even just a straight fighter.
You find out that demihumans don't start gaining letters instead of levels to make up for them being too powerful at early levels.
You find out that your cleric gets cool 9th level spells just like the magic-user always got.
You find out you can make a rogue instead of a thief.
You find out that the DM no longer has to kill the entire party off because his guesswork about the relative strength of a monster versus your characters was wrong.
You realize that its the game that is getting support and will thus have new products available, instead of running the same old modules.
What's funny is that virtually all these reasons why 3e is better than OD&D are why many OD&D players think it is worse. I think from that comes most of the impasse between players. One man's reasons for an edition being better are another man's reasons for it being worse.
The best way that I can put it was that the editions as written and supplemented match their markets.
In the 70's, us ex wargamers were content to describe an action, and let the DM worry about the details.
PC's were modelled on fiction or idealized selves [what if *I* was a Fighter, or whatnot], and multiclassing was the exception, not the norm.
It was Humanocentric, as was the vast majority of the source material.
ODD and 1st ed suited us fine. It gave us the skeleton to hang the story on, and we were happy with that.
Today, gamers are used to Video/CRPGs where the player can 'do' just about everything, as they have to in order to survive, and the game is based on one player, not a party.
They like to have skills and attributes quantified, and an aspect of the character, rather than leaving secondary attributes to the DM.
3rd ed suits them fine.
So, that's what we get...
Originally posted by James McMurray
You know 3E is better than OD&D when:
You realize that you can actually use all of the skills that a normal human could use.
?????
I think you are confused. Your fighter will only know at max, seven skills...he cannot learn how to do certain skills because...well who knows...because he cannot...who knows why not...he's just forbidden it by 3e rules...the DM actually has to HOUSERULE that those rules do not apply...
In OD&D characters could do just about anything they desired to try to do...just had to make the stat roll to suceed...
Unfortunately, even simple skills that are normally based off of attributes, such as ambidexterity and such...are Skillbased instead of attribute based in 3e...
You realize that your first level fighter doesn't have to be acarbon copy of most other first level fighters on the planet.
My fighter was never a Carbon copy of anyone else's fighter in D&D or AD&D...that's what a biography, stats, background, and most importantly...ROLEPLAYING was for.
So in essence you are saying that in 3e there is less roleplaying and more ROLLPLAYING to determine what your first level fighter is like...interesting...I could swear there are at least a dozen 3e players that would disagree with you...
You don't have to color your dice with a crayon to use them straight out of the box. ;)
You find out that your first level cleric gets to actually cast a spell (and isn't a carbon copy of every other first level cleric).
see note on fighter above...once again you are set against destroying 3e's honored reputation...shame on you.
You find out that Lawful means Lawful, Chaotic means Chaotic, and good/evil actually mean good/evil.
I could have sworn there was Good and Evil as well as Lawful and Chaotic in OD&D...or did they take it out in later editions.
You find out that your characters are not immortal from the very start.
You realize that your elf can be a cleric if he wants, or even just a straight fighter.
You find out that demihumans don't start gaining letters instead of levels to make up for them being too powerful at early levels.
You find out that your cleric gets cool 9th level spells just like the magic-user always got.
You find out you can make a rogue instead of a thief.
Please define what you think is a rogue, and what is a thief, and what the difference between the two is...and then explain why a 3e rogue is any different than an OD&D thief...
You find out that the DM no longer has to kill the entire party off because his guesswork about the relative strength of a monster versus your characters was wrong.
I never killed off an entire party in ANY edition due to guesswork. Are you inferring that 3e players are stupid, so stupid in fact that they need CR's to tell them how powerful or weak a creature is?
How naive and insulting to 3e and 3.5 players...afterall, most think the CR tables are wrong and off, and adjust accordingly. Just because you cannot and give your players underpowered encounters because you have problems keeping them in line with the 3e rules dictating treasure amounts and power levels...doesn't mean all the rest of us do...how insulting!
You realize that its the game that is getting support and will thus have new products available, instead of running the same old modules. :D
At least for the next 3 years when they come out with either the next edition or update. 3e players found that out the hard way...oh...well...around a few months ago...nigh 3 years after 3e was released...and now we're just SOL.
Of course, us 1st edders used those skills without needing a stat and rank to tell us we had them.
Yep, but if you went to a different gaming group, those skills would be handled in a completely different manner. Now you can rest assured that most groups will handle crafting your own armor the same way, or hiding. And what's more, anyone's character can learn to do it. They won't necessarily be as good at hiding as a rogue, or as good at martial arts as a Monk, but at least they can try.
Of course us 1st edders were able to make our characters different in style and personality, rather than just chrome.
That ability has not been lost, it has been enhanced by allowing your character's personality to affect his abilities. The ability to role-play a character concept regardless of rules is not a trait held only be older edition players.
Of course just what Lawful. Chaotic, Good, and Evil ARE are still argued...
True, but now we have more than Moorcock-esque alignments to argue about. And as we all know, more to argue about is always better. Just ask the Midle East. ;)
Of course us 1st edders actually played humans from time to time, rather than powergaming through non-human races
Of course, us 3rd edders actually play demi-humans from time to time, rather than powergaming through the human's bonus feat and extra skill points.
Of course, us 1st edders got to make Thieves, instead of rogues... And furthermore, we fought demons and devils, not Batzus and Tanrus or whatever they callz um now.
Ummm... They're called Demons and Devils now.
Sounds like you needed a better DM, not a different ed.
Nope, it was a fact of play that when tossing together a random filler encounter a DM had to rely solely on his understanding of the monster in question to determine balance. Now the DM can check the Challenge Rating, gague his group's current strength and what differences they might have from a standard party, and go from there.
Definitely need a better DM. Any 1st edder DM worth the title can create and run a game that's a dozen times better than the published material from any edition, simply because it is THEIRS, and they understand it at an authorical level.
Us third edders can do that too. Especially those of us who have evolved as our hobby evolved rather than being stuck in the past with an outdated toolset.
Creativity is not a trait possessed only by older edition DMs.I personally don't have the time required to come up with an entire game world or even an entire adventure. So instead I buy published works and change them to fit my group's style.
My condolences on your bad experiences with the 1st ed. [/b]
And mine as well on your bad experiences with 3E.
Today, gamers are used to Video/CRPGs where the player can 'do' just about everything, as they have to in order to survive, and the game is based on one player, not a party.
Any campaign that is based around a single player isn't going to be much fun for the other people at the table.
Originally posted by James McMurray
Any campaign that is based around a single player isn't going to be much fun for the other people at the table. [/b]
PRECISELY!!!!!!
The problem is that EVERYONE is the 'one'
Originally posted by James McMurray
Ummm... They're called Demons and Devils now.
http://www.skirmisher.com/tsr-ad1.gif
I think you are confused. Your fighter will only know at max, seven skills...he cannot learn how to do certain skills because...well who knows...because he cannot...who knows why not...he's just forbidden it by 3e rules...the DM actually has to HOUSERULE that those rules do not apply...
He might be untrained in them, but he can always try (except for a few notable exceptions which actually require training).
My fighter was never a Carbon copy of anyone else's fighter in D&D or AD&D...that's what a biography, stats, background, and most importantly...ROLEPLAYING was for.
But the moment your sword started swinging, you were the same guy. Every edition has roleplaying, 3.x allows you to actually have abilities different from your fellow fighters on top of personality.
So in essence you are saying that in 3e there is less roleplaying and more ROLLPLAYING to determine what your first level fighter is like...interesting...I could swear there are at least a dozen 3e players that would disagree with you...
I never said any such thing.
see note on fighter above...once again you are set against destroying 3e's honored reputation...shame on you.
See note above. Once again you are reading into a comment about stats and taking away a comment about roleplaying that was never made nor intended.
I could have sworn there was Good and Evil as well as Lawful and Chaotic in OD&D...or did they take it out in later editions.
OD&D had Law, Chaos, and Neutrality. 1e/2e introduced good and evil into the mix. Up until that point, Chaos was "the bad guys" and law was "the good guys".
Please define what you think is a rogue, and what is a thief, and what the difference between the two is...and then explain why a 3e rogue is any different than an OD&D thief...
The difference is in perception. A rogue can mean any number of things: a scoundrel, a sneaky scout, etc. A thief is "someone who steals things." IIRC, experience in 2e for thieves was largely based on how much money you could accumulate.
I never killed off an entire party in ANY edition due to guesswork. Are you inferring that 3e players are stupid, so stupid in fact that they need CR's to tell them how powerful or weak a creature is?
No, I'm implying that newer DMs, who do not have the experience of years of running the game, can easily choose the wrong encounter for their players. They will then either have to resort to some sort of DM fiat to avoid a TPK, or they will kill the entire party (or at least a large chunk of it).
Experienced DMs don't need CR any more than they did in previous editions. But its still a very handy tool to have around.
At least for the next 3 years when they come out with either the next edition or update. 3e players found that out the hard way...oh...well...around a few months ago...nigh 3 years after 3e was released...and now we're just SOL.
Why is anyone SOL? 3E and its update are close enough to one another that anyone who wishes to continue playing 3e (and there are huge numbers of people that do) can still play the game under that version. They can even take all of the new material and use it in their camapaigns.
The same will happen whenever 4E comes out. Some people will stick to 3E, some will stick to 3.5E. It happens with every single edition. It even happened with 1e/2e with players who played "straight" D&D and players who played "Skill & Options" D&D.
PRECISELY!!!!!!
The problem is that EVERYONE is the 'one'
Perhaps in the self-centered 3E gaming groups you've played in. Again, my condolences.
I'm not sure what that link is supposed to mean. My Monster Manual calls them Demons and Devils, and has since third edition came out. It was 2e that got scared by religious groups and took away the demon and devil monikers. Heck, 3E even has angels now.
Baatezu and Tannari subtypes are still around, they provide both a modicum of backwards compatibility for those wanting to play in a Planescape-esque setting, and a hierarchy amongst the demons and devil.
Character creation is a snap.
My head doesn't hurt after reading the rules (drinking while I read the rules may have something to do with this too, but I'd like to think otherwise).
Elves weren't all funny looking like they are now (all tall and pointy).
Okay, okay...but it should be pointed out that for some, the d20/3e incarnation of D&D is going to be their fond memory-nostalgia device which they'll promptly whip out and bang over the heads of those youngsters who'll be playing the 6th or 7th edition years from now (Remember when we still used plastic dice to play? And pencils? Not like those kids nowadays know anything about Prestiege Classes either! Sheesh!)
Originally posted by James McMurray
You realize that your elf can be a cleric if he wants, or even just a straight fighter.
Your elf can be just a straight fighter in OD&D.
In fact, your elf can be just a straight fighter in BECMI D&D as well. Just don't cast any spells. ;)
Seriously I do like what they have done in 3.0 and 3.5 so far that I have seen as a player (I have no intention of ever DMing them). That does not stop this thread from having the potential to be entertaining. (What I am most likely to DM is OD&D or 3rd Ed Runequest.)
2 comments on above posts:
Any on why 3E > OD&D should be a new topic - on this one they are definitely off-topic.
Any comparing 3E with AD&D (any version) are also off topic.
Anyway - my "reasons" why OD&D > 3E:
Your high level wizard has cast 7 spells of all levels today and still has plenty left in his memory...
The limited spell list forces you to be inventive rather than being told "no you need XXX spell to do that instead".
You can play some of the real classic modules without the DM spending hours trying to convert them.
Your high level fighter throws a '1' for damage and announces 254 damage to the horror of the DM (perhaps this is not better in OD&D after all)...
Kheldren
BTW 254 damage on a 1:
Master level Weapon Mastery in Voulge: 1d8+18 damage
Roll a to-hit of 17-20 double damage
Girdle of Giant Strength:
double damage (so
Originally posted by Kheldren
[b]Anyway - my "reasons" why OD&D > 3E:
Your high level wizard has cast 7 spells of all levels today and still has plenty left in his memory...
The limited spell list forces you to be inventive rather than being told "no you need XXX spell to do that instead".
You can play some of the real classic modules without the DM spending hours trying to convert them.
Your high level fighter throws a '1' for damage and announces 254 damage to the horror of the DM (perhaps this is not better in OD&D after all)...
Kheldren
BTW 254 damage on a 1:
Master level Weapon Mastery in Voulge: 1d8+18 damage
Roll a to-hit of 17-20 double damage
Girdle of Giant Strength:
double damage (so
Weapon Mastery in B/E/C/M/I is very much broken to begin with
I totally agree
- if you used it then all the modules (bar M2 I think) were totally out of balance and useless, plus a player who was unlucky on rolls for gaining increases was useless compared with the one who made them.Kheldren
Originally posted by GreyLord
It is now, because the person who is putting down OD&D doesn't even know the system correctly...he's basing all his opinions apparantly off the Redbox basic set of the 80's and not OD&D.
And the people putting down 3E displayed lack of system knowledge as well? So what? The posts were meant to be funny. I have even said several times that no edition is actually better than the rest, they just fit different play styles.
I tried to make some funny posts and Yorlum came back insulting my DMing style.
Don't make the digs if you can't stand the rebuttals is usually a good motto to follow.Originally posted by James McMurray
And the people putting down 3E displayed lack of system knowledge as well? So what? The posts were meant to be funny. I have even said several times that no edition is actually better than the rest, they just fit different play styles.
I tried to make some funny posts and Yorlum came back insulting my DMing style.
Now just a par-boiled minute here!
My 'insults' were confined to the following.
1. Lamenting that a DM couldn't figure in advance how powerful a monster should be to challenge, without overpowering a party, or, if they had made a mistake, not knowing enough to tweak it on the fly [Give the Hill Giant a disease which makes him weak, or whatever...]
Where else did you construe any offense? If I have offended, I apoplogize, for this was not my intent. I was trying to reply to your posts, point by point, in a like style [note my embarrassed agreement to the crayon comment...]
Originally posted by James McMurray
And the people putting down 3E displayed lack of system knowledge as well? So what? The posts were meant to be funny. I have even said several times that no edition is actually better than the rest, they just fit different play styles.
I tried to make some funny posts and Yorlum came back insulting my DMing style.
I believe you were the one that derailed the thread overall. The entire thread COULD be seen as a put down on 3e...but you specifically through not knowing all the rules about OD&D put down 3e gamers.
For the record, I do DM 3e, I use some 3.5 in houserules now, but overall, don't use that core ruleset, simply because I had gotten to know the rules of 3e well enough over the time after it came out, that I didn't want to have to switch up to 3.5 after such a short time. Overall, 3.5 is easy enough to take stuff from and adapt it to 3.0.
However, I digress, this shouldn't turn into a 3.0 vs. 3.5 discussion, especially on a D&D out of print board!
Though technically I suppose 3.0 IS out of print.
Originally posted by Serena DarkMyst
these type of arguements only further serve to separate the D&D fanbase.
T$R, WotC and Ha$bro split the fanbase. Welcome to the aftermath.
:popcorn:
You were the one that turned the thread form a list of "you know X is better when" to "Sounds like you need a new DM, and my condolences on your gaming experiences."
Greylord: When did I put down 3e players? Someone (you?) took my comment that characters didn't have to be carbon copies to mean I meant that all fighters in OD&D had personalities that were identical. It was meant to say that they all had combat abilities that were nearly identical.
I suppose I did derail the thread by making a list of why 3e is better than OD&D. I thought about making it a new topic but figured it could result in some interesting back and forth (like I did with reversing the OD&D's plusses into negatives). I never once insulted anyone's DMing skills, so although I may have derailed, I did not start the flaming. I also was not the first to step away from the "You know X is better than Y because" format that this humor-based thread was supposed to have.
Though technically I suppose 3.0 IS out of print.
Will the 3e-ers start flocking here soon? :D
I play 3e, but I played (and ran) the red basic box set (that's OD&D in my mind, I'm sorry I don't know who the heck Moday and Mentzer are, but neither have a lot of people who have posted in this thread from what I can tell). I've also played 1e and 2e. I loved them all (except 2e after the millions of supplements flooded the game). As one of my points even indicated, me and my group played an OD&D (red box - immortals) adventure as a sideline. My players were begging to come back tothe world of well-defined skills and character ability variety.
------------------
You know 3E is better than 1e/2e/OD&D when:
You don't have to ask every group you play with how they handle such simple things as jumping and climbing.
You can climb a wall without being branded a thief.
You don't open an adventure and find several references to "if this guy dies, he comes back regardless" or "this person cannot be killed until the climax of the adventure."
You learn you don't need a spreadsheet to figure out how your multiclassed chracter's experience translates into level gains.
There are now rules-based reasons for munchkins and powergamers not to be a character with 3 classes (Elven F/M/T or 1/2 Elven C/F/M).
You know OD&D is better than 3e when:
You get killed and can make up a new character in 5 minutes flat, ready to be killed again.
You get to drop cool names like "Moldvay" and "Mentzer" (Sp?) instead of silly names like "Skip".
You get to work your way up to being a Paladin instead starting there at first level. And the downsides outweigh the positives.
You know 1e is better than 3e or OD&D when:
You find the rating system in the back of your adventure to let your players know how well they'd have done in a tournament with their performance.
You don't have anything planned and flip straight to your random dungeon generation charts.
You get to have cool psionic powers by only making adie roll instead of having to spend class levels.
Originally posted by James McMurray You don't open an adventure and find several references to "if this guy dies, he comes back regardless" or "this person cannot be killed until the climax of the adventure."[/b]
Don't get me started on DragonLance again! Don't get me started...
R.A.
1. Rules light.
The DM requires fewer rules to resolve situations, thus allowing play to proceed smoothly.
2. Flexible.
The game relies on the DM to make decisions in the sake of roleplay, whereas d20 Fantasy relies on the rules to enforce play. At least d20 Fantasy doesn't have a rule in it like the "game that shall not be named", wherein the GM in that game, also known as Fate, may in fact be challenged by his players. This game [1E] is unlike chess in that the rules are not cut and dried. In many places they are guidelines and suggested methods only. This is part of the attraction...and is integral to the game.
3. Encourages roleplay.
The rules light approach encourages the DM and the players to roleplay and to have fun, rather than spend extraordinary amounts of time calculating x, y, and z.
4. Focus on the setting.
Fewer rules allow the game to focus on the setting, which provides "color" to the gaming experience. Newer versions of the game focus on the rules to the exclusion of the setting.
5. Support of simplicity and complexity.
For example: initiative is determined with one die, and that single die roll can be broken down into further details as needed/desired. Does not apply to 2E as 2E and later integrate the complexity as a default rather than an option.
6. No need to reinterpret concepts.
The core concepts (Alignment, race, monsters, spells, etc.) are used as originally intended. d20 Fantasy applies these core concepts in an arbitrary fashion. An example of this is in regards to wounds. Horrible wounds are already considered in negative hit points. Giving a "critical hit" without the loss of total hit points is arbitrary because it disregards the acquired hit points of the experience turn it just into extra flab to chop off.
7. Two-way conversion.
The D&D Rules Cyclopedia has three pages devoted to converting characters from 2E to D&D and vice versa. d20 Fantasy has a 24 page booklet to do the same thing but it only converts in one direction, from 2E to d20 Fantasy. This underscores the fact that the two systems are totally dissimilar to each other.
8. Different attitude in the game.
A "dungeons are limited and ridiculous" attitude permeates d20 Fantasy. The older systems stressed that the dungeon was as large as you wished it to be, along with lots of adventure in those unlimited corridors. And dungeon crawls were FUN. Dying was FUN. d20 Fantasy seems to wish to take the fun away and replace it with something else.
9. Look and feel.
d20 Fantasy's use of irrelevant text, big fonts, and borders in place of game utility leads its players to believe that they are erudite and blithe, when in fact they have been fooled. For the older game, though more spartan in its illustrations, and far less flashy in its presentation, is far more entertaining and educational to read than the newer work. You can actually learn the game as you play it, whereas the newer work must be read before it can be properly played.
10. Balance
This is a thorny topic, as it can be said that d20 Fantasy is just as balanced as the older system. And in its own way, it is balanced. But that's the problem, it's TOO balanced. In the older system balance was there, but it was not foremost in people's minds. In d20 Fantasy, unless everything is perfectly balanced, the whole house of cards falls. Parties need to be perfectly balanced. Monster encounters need to be perfectly balanced against the perfectly balanced parties they face. So now by the system's very nature, it's now impossible to have overwhelming numbers facing off against the party because the party will actually cry foul because the adventure is not balanced.
Too much balance stifles creativity, along with too many rules.
11. No need of feats, Attacks of Opportunity, or any other debris that d20 Fantasy provides.
What purpose do feats serve anyway except to cater to a computer game mentality? In the days of the original game, feats weren't needed. People actually used their imaginations. Feats only serve to take away the need to be imaginative. As for AoO? Well now, let's try this:
Thief Player: "I attempt to sneak around the [opponent] so I can strike at his back."
DM: [Makes a snap judgment call to keep the game moving] Roll a d% and see if you can do it [does NOT tell the Thief the target number, which happens to be the Thief's dexterity score of 16 and that anything lower than that will succeed].
Thief Player: [Thief rolls and gets a 24 on that d%] Did I succeed?
DM: I'm not telling you that. What do you do next?
Thief Player: I attempt to backstab. [Rolls d20 and gets a 9]. Did I hit?
DM: [Does NOT reveal that target number nor the THAC0] As you attempt to sneak behind [opponent], he/it notices out of the corner of his/its eye you attempting to move around him/it and is prepared for your attack, turning just before your attack would have hit his/its back. Your backstab attempt glances off his/its armor/hide, doing no damage.
That's how roleplay is done. And I didn't need a feat to do it. An attack of opportunity? That just merely slows things down even further. Unnecessary, useless drek.
12. Experience
The unified experience table in d20 Fantasy is yet another example of enforcing unneeded game balance. All classes now gain levels at the same points instead of the older system, where each and every class had its own Experience charts. Everyone progressed at the rate dictated for them in the older system, which made sense, if you think about it. Wizards naturally progressed slower as they would rather do research than adventuring. Fighters were very fast in advancing, Clerics not nearly as fast as Fighters but faster than Wizards, etc.
XX. I’m triskaidekaphobic. (there is no number xx)
14. Less powerful.
The characters, being less powerful than their d20 Fantasy brethren, actually need to use their minds a LOT MORE to get out of situations, not just use their swords. There is no need for the increase in power as seen in d20 Fantasy. 2E is just as guilty of the power inflation as d20 Fantasy. By upping the power levels as has occurred, it tends to cheapen the entire gaming experience. Roleplaying skill will always win out over raw power, as has been proven by the legions who continue to play OD&D, Classic D&D, and 1E.
15. No need of epic levels
The original game could handle up to 36th level without difficulty. 1E could handle up to 36th level as well (because at 36th level magic resistance became useless because the level of the character was so high). d20 Fantasy finishes off at level 20, but wait! You now have the Epic Level books, where you can send your overinflated character to new heights of power, even going so far as to face gods if you wish. Sorry, but the original rules were quite capable of handling high levels without having to resort to a second book just for those levels.
16. Greyhawk
This is an extremely sore subject with me, so I won't really go into great detail about this, but though the default setting of all the systems is Greyhawk (Mystara in the case of B/E/C/M, but Greyhawk works perfectly well in that environment as well), how d20 Fantasy treats Greyhawk leaves much to be desired. What d20 Fantasy calls Greyhawk is in no way, shape, or form Greyhawk. I had a lengthy debate with others regarding Living Greyhawk, but suffice it to say that Living Greyhawk is not living, because it is based upon the garbage that appeared in 2E, which essentially destroyed Greyhawk as we all knew it.
17. Saving Throws
In the new system, DC's for sleep and its ilk are lower than DC's for death rays, stone to flesh, and the like. In 1E the best saves the player had were against spells that would instantly kill. In d20 Fantasy this is not the case. To cite an example:
At 11th level a party is fighting a beholder. The beholder turns and looks at a player and uses the "flesh to stone" eyestalk. Wham! The player is dead because the DC for "Flesh to Stone" is so high. In the next round the beholder turns to face another player and uses the "sleep" eyestalk. The player manages to save because of the low DC of "sleep". Unfortunately, that same player then encounters the "disintegrate" eyestalk. The high DC will do the character in.
At higher levels there's too much number crunching, and the higher you are in level the worse it gets. Sometimes the bonus "to hit" is larger than the die you roll.
18. No need of prestige Classes and rampant multiclassing.
The older game systems did not have prestige classes that you could take when you've gotten to an insanely powerful limit in the game. They weren't needed. Perhaps the closest thing the older systems have to a prestige class is the Druid in Classic D&D (the Rules Cyclopedia). But even they were simply a Cleric with a different spell list. Prestige classes in the game are for those who wish to be even more insanely powerful so you can heap a whole lot of damage upon a monster.
I find the liabilities for taking the prestige class to not offset the benefits. But on the flip side, since the older systems didn't need prestige classes anyway, there are no penalties to speak of.
I just do not see the need to have any race be capable of being any class. I always thought there was more of a possible cultural or physical reason. For classes, it always made sense why elves couldn't be paladins or dwarves couldn't be druids. Their cultures are so different than humans that such classes weren't necessary. The dwarf situation is a no brainer: they've always been a culture centered on hard labor, mining, stone craftsmanship, toe-to-toe combat, etc. Looking at that culture, a dwarf being a druid is such an opposite slant to what the beliefs and path dwarves typically follow. While there is a possibility that a dwarf may want to follow that path, I think for rules sake (and for the sake of possible expansion books) this was never touched on in the PHB or DMG. Same thought applies to Elves as paladins. A paladin is basically a holy warrior- the soldier in the army of a deity. Not going into any real-world religious implications (I'm new and don't want to step on toes), I don't think the race of elves need such an uber-soldier (Cleric spell casting abilities at higher levels, can cure light wounds, resist disease AND use all the stuff a fighter can without the cleric penalties, it's an uber soldier with the only con being the strict alignment/role play rule). I don't think the elves as a culture would benefit culturally from having such warriors in the ranks.
19. The game has magic.
L Ron Hubbard wrote:
"When you mix science fiction with fantasy you do not have a pure genre. The two are, to a professional, separate genres. I notice today there is a tendency to mingle them and then excuse the result by calling it "imaginative fiction." Actually they don't mix well: science fiction, to be credible, has to be based on some degree of plausibility; fantasy gives you no limits at all. Writing science fiction demands care on the part of the author; writing fantasy is as easy as strolling in the park. (In fantasy, a guy has no sword in his hand; bang, there's a magic sword in his hand.) This doesn't say one is better than the other. They are simply very different genres from a professional viewpoint."
It is this difference in genres that serves to irritate me personally when it comes to d20 Fantasy, for it seems as if the authors, in attempting to codify the rules, took away the magic that made the older versions so fun to play. That is why I won't part with what I have for a game. Even though my core books consist of either the Rules Cyclopedia, the PHB/DMG/MM combination, or the PHB/Holmes Basic combination, it's still familiar, is still Dungeons & Dragons, and still has that magic and fun that a good game should have. If we were to compare these games to drugs, d20 Fantasy is a "quick high" if you will, but it doesn't have and won't have the addictive qualities of what came before it, OD&D, and 1E.
20. The game has soul and feel.
I really think rules without any soul or feeling behind them are really difficult to play and play well. Without any feeling in the words that are written on the page, what point is there in truly playing? Can there be any point in even playing when all many people care about is "how do I win"? Many of the new blood out there, especially the kids that have grown up with computer games, don't adjust well to a game where there is actually balance in mind. In reading through the d20 Fantasy rules all I could think to myself throughout it was "computer game". That may be unfair. You decide.
21. It's still here.
d20 Fantasy has been around for some 3 1/2 years and has been revised. Meanwhile, there are players out there still playing OD&D, 1E, and B/E/C/M D&D to this very day, and those systems have been around for 30, 24, and 23 years now. They have an established base that will never go away. Which makes you wonder just how many people play the older games that AREN'T on the Internet?
We may never know. But here are 20 solid reasons that the older game systems are better than what Hasbro/WotC is putting out now.
1. Better rules.
The DM doesn't have to decide on the fly how most things will work, and the players can expect it to work the same in almost any game group they join.
2. Flexible.
The system in place easily allows for expansion when something that isn't covered comes up.
3. Encourages roleplay.
Not having to spend as much time deciding how undefined things work means you can focus more on role-playing your character.
4. Focus on the setting.
More rules means the DM can spend less time explaining and defining his house rules and more time explaining and defining his world.
5. Support of simplicity and complexity.
For example: initiative is determined with one die, and that single die roll can be broken down into further details as needed/desired. Does not apply to 2E as 2E and later integrate the complexity as a default rather than an option.
6. No need to reinterpret concepts.
The core concepts (Alignment, race, monsters, spells, etc.) are used as originally intended. d20 Fantasy applies these core concepts in an arbitrary fashion. An example of this is in regards to wounds. Hit points still mean an ability to avoid or partially avoid blows. Thus a critical hit is still just an attack that took more out of you, at least until the one that drops you.
7. One-way conversion.
3E is so good that there is no reason to ever convert backwards, and converting forwards is as simple as looking up the creature's stats. Most spells from older editions still exist, although a few have changed names.
8. Different attitude in the game.
We now have more ways to explore our world than just the dungeon. The Expert rules (levels 4-10?) attempted to include this, but it was just a painful tack-on to the idea that an adventure was meant to be a walk through a cavern killing things.
PCs are also more survivable. That means you get to focus on developing your personality more instead of just waiting for the death-hammer to drop.
9. Look and feel.
Most d20 books are not only functional from a rules perspective, but also well-presented. The move from cold stat blocks to well-illustrated and beautifully presented typefaces is an expression of the gaming industry's love for the genre.
10. Balance
Years of playtesting went into the game before it ever hit the shelves. The goal of this playtesting was to ensure that players did not have to be as concerned that their friends' characters would consitently outshine theirs simply because they chose a different class. Gone are the days when low-level wizards hid behind their friends, quietly earning experience until they were high enough level to finish adventures by themselves.
11. Feats and Attacks of Opportunity
Feats allow character customization. No longer is every first level fighter the same as every other first level fighter in combat ability. One may focus on tripping, while the other decides he wants to be a grappler.
Attacks of opportunity make battle more strategic. No longer can you stroll calmly around a pitched battle, knowing you are safe simply because it is your initiative and thus time has effectively frozen for everyone except you.
12. Experience
No longer do you need a spreadsheet to determine whether your fighter/cleric/magic-user levelled up. Classes are balanced against each other by themselves, and thus the arbitrary balance that the different XP tables tried to provide is no longer necessary.
13. Power level changed
The characters, now being in situations where their enemies can be just as powerful as they are, must use their minds. No longer are special combat maneuvers and spells usually restricted only to monsters.
14. No need of an Immortals set
If you want o keep playing past the core rules' upper limits, you don't have to go on great uests and become an immortal. You can stay (demi)human and continue adventuring.
16. Campaign settings
By virtue of the OGL, those who don't have the time to create their own worlds, and those who don't want to play in Greyhawk, can purchase any number of different campaign settings, all of which will mesh well with the d20 core ruleset. Those who wish to play in Greyhawk can also do so by using the older supplements. As has been shown, they are easily convertable.
17. Saving Throws
Saving throws are now simplified and codified. No longer do you have to consult a cryptic chart, you just have three values, and they change at a steady rate. If you need something's saving throw values on the fly you can simply calaulate them.
DCs have also been fixed. Its no longer just as easy for a 1st level wizard to charm a 10th level fighter as it is for a 20th level wizard to do the same thing. The higher level wizard's undoubtedly higher intelligence and access to feats will ensure that he has a better chance of bending minds to his will.
18. Prestige Classes and balanced multiclassing
No longer do we need to fear the power of the elven Fighter/Magic-user/Thief or the half-elven Cleric/Fighter/Magic-user. Characters who now want to multiclass must do so in a balanced manner.
Prestige classes are now something that are available to everyone, instead of just druids, paladins, and knights.
19. The game has magic.
Despite the changes to the rules, the game maintains the same feel it has always had. Heroes stride out into the world to battle evil. Some may die, some may fall, and a few greats gain everlasting glory.
20. The game has soul and feel.
Thanks to its roleplaying aspects and the availablilty of third party material, flavorful additions to a game can be found to suit all tastes. Even younger audiences, who have previsouly been captivated only by finding the next BFG in Doom-style shoot-em-ups can be drawn into a game under the nurturing wing of an excellent storyteller and dungeonmaster.
21. It's still here.
3rd edition came out in a time when the RPG industry was crumbling. TSR's poor business strategies had felled the giant from within, and ICE's similar situation was also proving to be the downfall of its business. White Wolf was rising as the next big start in the RPG world, but anyone who wasn't a goth or an Anne Rice fan usually shunned their games. Wizards of the Coast took a failed business and breathed new life into it. By opening the game's development to outside companies via the OGL they ensured that the game will continue to thrive for years, even if its current owners fall by the wayside.
--------------------------
We may never know, but here are 20 solid reasons why 3rd edition is better than its predecessors. ;)
d20 Fantasy?
First and foremost....the game is called Dungeons and Dragons...not d20 Fantasy. You older edition buffs want respect....give the same respect in return. We play the same darn game for cryin out loud! We may have different rules editions, but its the same darn game...
The rest of my post will be dedicated to responding to as many off your 20 reasons as I can.
1. Rules light.
Ill give you that....in the third edition there are rules to cover nearly all situations...but the same old D&D staple remains...if there isnt a rule to govern a given situation by all means DMs...make it up and stick to it.
2. Flexible
The third edition is very flexible. I don't think that there is anything that I could not play with the current rules set. And whats more...I dont think that there is any limit to the fun either.
But as far as rules flexibility...The main mechanic is so darn simple....If you cant remember the main mechanic (d20+modifier) then you shouldnt be playing any version of D&D.
3. Encourages roleplay.
Funny...the first thing I thought of when I cracked open my third edition core rules was how the rules gave me the ability to create the most interesting characters...Encouraging roleplay is not the job of game rules....that is for the people who play the game itself...D&D is what you make it...If your group prefers hack n slash roll play over high fantasy storytelling then thats what they will do. Any edition suffers from this.
4. Focus on the setting
Once again...not a job for the core rules....that is a job for campaign settings. The core rules were written so as to be able to be applied to any setting. The third edition rules as I said above are simple enough to fade into the background....that being said I have played in games that got bogged down because of rules lookup....these poor saps should have been prepared for their game....If someone does the rules a favor and reads them they wont have to go through with this problem.
5. Support of simplicity and complexity
Simply said....that describes the rules of the third edition entirely...like I said....the game is what you make it.
6. No need to reinterpret concepts
I think this is a problem of the 3e books....the constant reinterpretation and reiterating of the rules....Ive seen some classes reprintes over and again....jeez.....if it was that good as to print it three times why wasnt it in the core books to begin with?
7. Two-way conversion.
The reason that the conversion booklet for 3e only went one way was that WotC is not in the business of converting their system to a system that they do not support or gain profit from....Yes...WotC is in the business to make money....so what
8. Different attitude in the game.
Once again, the attitude of the game is decided by those who play it. If a group thinks that dungeon crawls are stupid, then no rules edition is going to change that.
9. Look and feel
Personally...If I am going to spend my money on a product then it better darn well look good as well. Its about time that D&D books looked as good as they were.
10. Balance
An important factor in the D&D game period....no matter what edition...but I will give you this...there is too much focus on it in the new rules
11. No need of feats, Attacks of Opportunity, or any other debris that d20 Fantasy provides
Thats entirely subjective...up to those who like them or dont. I tend to like them...but my opinion is just as valid as the guy who doesnt.
12. Experience
I hated that the amounts of XP you needed in prior editions to level wasnt equal from class to class.....that just plain wasnt fair. And while the game simulates fantasy life which is not at all fair....its a game...which needs to be.
14. Less powerful.
THe characters in 3e are jacked up in power...yes indeedy....but then....the monsters and challenges are too....
15. No need of epic levels
You say in your post that OD&D had levels that went as far as 36.....extremely high level gaming.....thats all epic levels are. And you also allude to epic level books.....theres only one....The Epic Level Handbook....But like I was saying....OD&D has super high level.....3e has super high level....how is this making either better than the other? It isnt.
16. Greyhawk
It isnt 3e's fault for crapping up GreyHawk. They were simply obliged to go with what had been done....what about those who like the way GreyHawk was and got their way when it was ported to 3e....they are happy....and if it had been retconned and changed they would have cried foul...and been in the right to do so
17. Saving Throws
Once again...entirely subjective....depends on which method you and your group like. This is not a way to gauge which edition is superior.
18. No need of prestige Classes and rampant multiclassing.
I feel the need to defend this part of my beloved edition. These classes and Prestige classes are a way of further differentiating your character from every other character around. Same with the open multiclassing.....It makes for totally flexible and custom characters....unlike any older edition. In previous editions every fighter at least was similar.....in most cases every fighter I ever saw in previous editions ended up being so similar it was uncanny....and boring.
19. The game has magic
20. The game has soul and feel
Im going to reply to these two together
So does 3e...the best darn roleplaying experiences I ever had were in the third edition.....I can remember when an ally was turned into a vampire....she was my characters closest friend....He was driven to tears as he found what had happened to his elven bard friend...she was a follower of light....a friend to the daytime natural world...and had become an unnatural creature of the night, anethema to what she was.....He waited till his ally dwarf was sleeping, stole his mace of disruption and gave chase to the vampire who was his friend....in order to give her soul the rest in death she deserved.....My character failed...and the vampire escaped.....He still searches for her to this day....and for a way to return her to what she once was....or grant her peace in death
Now that is roleplaying magic....best darn sessions I ever had....I cant wait to see what my DM cooks up in the story next time.....
All in 3E....All with soul brotha
21. It's still here.
With the legions of players of old editions who are out there and supposedly hurting the 3E business by not buying products you'd think that some damage would have been done by now....
We're still here as well.....and we are here for the long run.
But then..your opinion is as valid as mine....doesnt make your game any better though.
You know you miss OD&D when:
You still use your OD&D books for reference
I always use the OD&D monster manuals and modules for visual references. I totally prefer the art work from 1E AD&D, when compared to 3E.
and it certainly is faster to pull treasure together using good old treasure types.
I've enjoyed all three editions. I have been able to find good in all.
1st edition. I only know it as AD&D. It was the game I grew up with.
2nd edition. I liked the kits, I thought it was a good idea.
3rd edition. It's full of possibilities.
I have to agree with the fact that 3e doesn't stop roleplaying, I play it PBEM and we role play everything!!!
AD&D will always mean the most because it reminds me of a simpler time in my life.
I'm still trying to figure out why, if you're playing 3e (or anything newer), you'd be on a board that is most definatly NOT about the version you play. Only on topics like this do I see new names pop up.
Originally posted by Aliquid
I totally prefer the art work from 1E AD&D, when compared to 3E.
I certainly agree with this. The 1E books and modules had a much greater variety of styles represented in them -- Trampier, Otus, and Dee were all quite distinctive. Some of the art in 3E is fine, but it seems that most current WotC artists are trying to emulate the same annoying goth/punk/cartoon style. Ugh. I'm getting pretty tired of completely unrealistic weapons and armour, tattoos, piercings, etc..
Thankfully WotC is starting to step away from the style a bit. For instance, the Book of Exalted Deeds has some very nice pieces and a very low spike to picture ratio.
Originally posted by James McMurray
Then you haven't looked very closely (at least for my name). I came here originally to get input on the Keep on the Borderlands (in the thread of the same title). The response was so friendly and the board so nostalgic that I stayed around.
You'll note I didn't specify any particular names. And thank you for giving me an answer for your particular case.
Originally posted by James McMurray
While I too ama bit tired of the spiky look of a lot of the 3rd edition art, I think we can all agree that the younger generation is the primary target audience, and presumably market research has shown that they like the spiky look.
Thankfully WotC is starting to step away from the style a bit. For instance, the Book of Exalted Deeds has some very nice pieces and a very low spike to picture ratio.
Actually, funny enough, WotC skipped a LOT of the market research when they did 3e.
First off they ignored the items that really were houseruled. In addition, they took many of the hated 'Players and DM's Options' and morphed them into the current skills. Marketing stated that TSR's move in that direction wasn't exactly beneficial as far as money went...but WotC made half the system based around that idea of morphing and came up with the idea of skills and feats.
Next they ignored the marketing that showed that if they pushed out sourcebooks and crunchy items, they soon would engulf the market with more than they could sell and players would lose interest. They DID pay attention to the fact that players did not want as much information about different worlds, but were more into the "crunch" of items. They also paid attention that the bigger buyers were players, and hence if focusing on the players, they could sell more books then focusing on the DM's.
They ignored the market research concerning the matter that most players were playing 2e core instead of the 2e add ons, and that in fact there were a lot of 1e players. They seemed to try to cater to the 1e crowd, and even advertised 3e as bringing back the 1e soul and spirit. Unfortunately, the 1e crowd stayed around and bought the corebooks to see if this was true, and one or two other books, and then left. They failed to capture a majority of the 1e crowd.
What they DID gain was a new audience from the Computer Gaming arenas, as well as a bunch of the myriads of other roleplayers in addition to a few from 1e and 2e. They WANTED to ignore the OGL idea...seriously, they wanted to throw it away and break the key...But there was one young persistant man who didn't let them...and hence OGL was born. I think it was a smart idea...there are STILL those in the higher ups that don't think it was smart. I personally think it promoted the game of 3e further.
However, due to the fact that they ignored a LOT of the marketing research (as to what gamers of D&D were really playing at the time AND what players really wanted...and the final fact that without that support, and with flooding the market with books, the sales would die off since the amounts of the core books were finite, or eventually enough people would have tried it that everyone that wanted one would have one...always a problem with RPGs).
Because of this, in a mere 2 years, they found themselves in trouble. At that point, they had a massive layoff of employees that they deemed were unneeded. In fact, at the rate they were going, they could foresee that within another two years they'd be in the exact same spot TSR was in when they went bankrupt. All because, just like TSR, they ignored some of the vital marketing research people tout.
3e came out with a bang, a BIG bang, due to hype, and promises, however, once they saturated the market, and disillusioned a lot of others, the sales dropped off much more than expected, and in the light of how much they were dropping off...D&D was in trouble.
3.5 was NOT in the gameplan (it was, but not for the timing when it came out), but it came quick. You see, there were some other people, not in the RPG business, but in the Wargaming business that had found a solution, or at least somewhat of a solution. That was to release new editions of their game, Warhammer, every so many years.
In addition, there was also the CCG's that had a similar model, although perhaps not so strong in market strength once their popularity waned. Hence, if they could reissue a new edition, they could infuse the market once more. This was one portion of Market research they could not ignore, for they saw that in a years time, unless something was done, they would have BIG PROBLEMS.
They just needed a few loyal fans, who would always buy books, and they could keep the business and name up. In fact, they could rerelease almost everything they had released before, but with more content. This solved the problem of driving away the older audience, as well as the problem of market saturation.
In addition they saw some other ideas of the wargaming market. That of the sales of miniatures. If a group requires miniatures, then typically those people keep buying miniatures. So they tried to implement that as well.
Hence 3.5, which though it hasn't sold as well as 3e, it is keeping a smaller, but perhaps more business savy group of people in charge of D&D, employed, and D&D, or at lease D&D D20 is still alive and kicking.
Just a little note on all that market research people keep stating is kicked around. Some of it is used, but a lot of it is actually ignored. Typically they accept their own market research, but ignore the outside research sources, which, when coming from universities, other gaming companies, and other such sources, is rather foolish. But the game goes on, I expect 4e to arrive at the end of the current book publishing cycle (after they've republished a majority of the books that they've published before, though many have been renamed, we all know what they are doing). And then the cycle will continue, and they'll have a revised 4e, and then 5e.
Who knows how long they can keep it alive, perhaps indefinately. Warhammer and Magic are still around afterall.
And Ill tell you why...intelligent consumers will get duped once and go back for more....twice and they become cautious, three times???? Absolutely not...of course you will have the die hard hanger onners.....But those are no consumer base.
My point is, we players simply arent stupid enough to keep falling for it.
And you might disagree with me, but we represent the average player Id like to say, or at least I do...And I am not about to keep throwing down money for rules sets...Ive found the one that works for me...so...WotC wants to put out another? Oh well.....Im not buyin it.
This is not to say that the d20 system doesn't have merit - in many ways it did a good job of streamlining the D&D system; but in other places it went the other direction and made things more complex then they needed to be (most notably in areas related to combat).
I'm currently playing in a 2E (I'm on a break from DMing and the only other person who will run a game insists upon using 2E) game and it's making me appreciate more the parts I LIKE about 3.xE. And I find myself occasionally flipping through ye olde Rules Cyclopedia and marvelling at the simplicity of this and that whilst being bowled over by things like the silliness of relative weapon damages - especially in regards to mastery.
And of course magic items in all previous editions were handled much better.
Thus I'm rewriting the d20 SRD to suit my tastes (which often means changing things so that they resemble an earlier edition), and I'm not the only DM who's done or is doing so. Why not change one of the earlier editions? Because d20 has a better (IMO) underlying system and is more easily modified.
And now, 13 points regarding why edition x is better than edition y:
13. I live in a humanocentric world, I certainly don't want to play in one.
13. Magic items shouldn't be purchased like candy in a store, despite what economics 101 would have you believe.
13. Acquiring a reasonable amount of skills as well as having a reasonable chance to succeed at them is desirable.
13. A skill-point micromanagement nightmare is NOT desirable.
13. Elves in the current and all previous editions are shorter than humans - future editions will hopefully improve on this by making them the tall, gangly things they should be (or better yet just get rid of the race entirely).
13. Monster frequency and ecology is useful information to have around, even if you sometimes ignore it.
13. Multi-classing is useful as long as it doesn't get out of hand.
13. Racial classes are a great way to help define a race's role in the world...
13. ...but they shouldn't be the only way for a non-human race to advance.
13. Not every non-spellcaster has to excel in melee combat.
13. Only the fighter-types should get multiple melee attacks per round.
13. You should only be able to cast one spell per round unless you are a god or have the power of an artifact at your command.
13. Roll high, roll low, roll sideways - make up your mind.
Why OD&D is better than 3E:
1. I can make a house rule, and share it without fifty people jumping down my throat about how I've "Ruined/overpowered/underpowered class _____" If I want a class to be stronger/weaker for whatever reason, I should be allowed to.
2. More mystery. Thigs happned for mysterious reasons, not because charactr X took feat X and made item X. Although I don't have a problem with magic item making, I still like at least a certain sense of mystery in some things.
3. Demihumnas were more interesting to play, and rare. I kinda like that.
4. Easier to make on the fly rules, on account that there were so many exceptions already to the rules, I could throw in a few more, and it wouldn't hurt the game. doing so in 3E tends to make things look silly.
Why OD&D is better than 2E
1. No dual classing. dual classing was the first bad idea invented, as I heard it was in 1E too, I never played 1E, I skipped straight to 2E, which would be my mistake, I should have held out until 3E.
2. No stupid overpowered elf-only book that didn't do anything but make elves elite. (Anone who claims that 3E is more power gamey than 2E gets handed my copy, forced to read it, then tell me if they still think 3e caters to munchkins. No one has yet.)
3. No skills and powers. HAted that book, hated how any DM who owned it insisted that I altered my campaign to use it, when in fact I made quite clear that I didn't use or like that book.
4. Artwork was better in OD&D, I thought. (3E has some decent artwork, but there's a lot of really stupid pictures in 3E too, I'd say that OD&D was better overall.)
What I like about 3E (Just for argument)
1. Faster leveling, faster power gain. I don't game that much, I have a lot of responsibilities. With 3e, I can gain every couple of weeks ans still feel like we're getting somewhere.
2. Simpler rules than 2E (but not OD&D). 2E was a mass of mostly unrelated rules that just didn't make sense.
3. More DM power. I can alter things much easier now, when I can avoid other DMs reaming me for altering it.
4. Encourages more roleplaying. (I have had DMs who would basically make a fool out of my characters because I stutter in real life. therefore, they prevented me from ever roleplaying because of my impedement, by having NPCs mock me, not listen to me, at times they attack me for wasting their time. Social skills = prevents smacktard DMs from punishing my character for something I can't help in real life. And I've heard arguments otherwise, most social skill haters actually don't know how they are used in 3E, and therefore have no leg to stand on. the book itself says just rolling dice won't work, you have to roleplay to use them. Saying "I'm using Diplomacy", then rolling a die does nothing at all.)
Two interesting points on marketing.
You see on this thread and others on these boards how many different opinions there are. I don't know how marketing could siff through them all and come up with one direction to head in.
In all the marketing research, did anyone suggest actually marketing this product. I know they have advertisements in magazines and of course, Dragon, but I mean mainstream. Television. I know many will disagree with me, but I still say some TV advertising would do some good.
Originally posted by beavis123
I won't argue with you about your assestment of the market research by WoTC. I've never looked into it. I respect your information.
Two interesting points on marketing.
You see on this thread and others on these boards how many different opinions there are. I don't know how marketing could siff through them all and come up with one direction to head in.
In all the marketing research, did anyone suggest actually marketing this product. I know they have advertisements in magazines and of course, Dragn, but I mean mainstream. Television. I know many will disagree with me, but I still say some TV advertising would do some good.
Good point, although, I would think that, given the general market of the game, maybe Internet ads would be more cost effective. Not on game sites only, either, but big hitters like Yahoo, Amazon and Google.
Yes, even I get caught up in fanboyism at times, no one is immune, it seems.
Originally posted by Serena DarkMyst
First and foremost....the game is called Dungeons and Dragons...not d20 Fantasy. You older edition buffs want respect....give the same respect in return. We play the same darn game for cryin out loud! We may have different rules editions, but its the same darn game...
Respect is earned and not granted. d20 Fantasy has not earned MY respect, and I am not required to give it, in spite of the fact that I am posting this on a set of boards where dissenting points of view are edited out of existence solely to put forth the illusion of a happy community. There are many people who are not happy with the utter travesty of a game that purports to be Dungeons & Dragons, but you will never see those people, for they know the true purpose of this board, and actively stay away from it.
Oh, and just to let you know, it's not even close to the same game I play. For if it were even close to the same game I play then it would be BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE, which it isn't. If what you've written here is the BEST you can come up with, then you have a long way to go, especially coming from a mere woman.
You are dismissed.
If what you've written here is the BEST you can come up with, then you have a long way to go, especially coming from a mere woman.
You are dismissed.
Break out the flaming battle axe..... as we have one of two situations on our hands...
1. A troll
2. the beginning of a nasty flame war
Respect is earned and not granted. d20 Fantasy has not earned MY respect, and I am not required to give it,
If you want respect from those who play D&D 3e you sure as hell better respect them.
There are many people who are not happy with the utter travesty of a game that purports to be Dungeons & Dragons, but you will never see those people, for they know the true purpose of this board, and actively stay away from it.
Ok....Like I dont see people here daily that arent happy with the current version of D&D. More power to em...let them play the game they want. Im gonna go back to having fun with my game.
utter travesty of a game that purports to be Dungeons & Dragons,
It's still D&D, no matter what ridiculous arguement you come up with. YOu just cant change that it is still D&D.
For if it were even close to the same game I play then it would be BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE, which it isn't.
Well....lets see....backwards compatible....is there a need? Hell no. If they were in the business of people pleasing then yes it would be needed. But as I said, any gaming company is in business to make money....You just plain don't make money by supporting an outdated rules system...especially when you are trying to sell a new edition of those rules....and anyone who says otherwise is just plain ignorant.
If what you've written here is the BEST you can come up with, then you have a long way to go, especially coming from a mere woman.
That statement makes you sound about as piggish as an orc. It's also inflammatory and rude...I posted valid comments on a post without resorting to insulting the poster...Is there some reason you could not? I didnt deserve that disdainful, and flat out nasty comment. Consider yourself reported.
You are dismissed
Oh...really....I have your permission even....
sheesh.....could you be any more pompous?
You realize that you missed the point...
- when you jump in on the idea, to start a flame-war off-off a collection of jokes
- you believe your edition is better, just because you haven't played the other
You won't realize the point is moot...
- when your DM sucks, regardless of Edition
Edit:
As is seen in previous answers I have to edit mine, so no one is offenden (geez adults can be so annoying my step-daughter would say
)My last sentence is meant in the following way:
You can't appreciate a role-playing experience if the DM is bad, that's not to say that OD&D supporters or 3E D&D supporters are bad DMs, because they can't operate in the other(?) system...
Originally posted by Serena DarkMyst
I really dont see that being the game's fate......
And Ill tell you why...intelligent consumers will get duped once and go back for more....twice and they become cautious, three times???? Absolutely not...of course you will have the die hard hanger onners.....But those are no consumer base.
My point is, we players simply arent stupid enough to keep falling for it.
And you might disagree with me, but we represent the average player Id like to say, or at least I do...And I am not about to keep throwing down money for rules sets...Ive found the one that works for me...so...WotC wants to put out another? Oh well.....Im not buyin it.
hm...
Sorry to doublepost, but I have to comment this
For those who don't want to read it all:
Serena replied to the assumption, that D&D would end like Warhammer, a new edition every other year...
@ Serena: It works. Plain and simple. There will always be enough people, that want to stay "up-to-date". Warhammer is bought every time, even by players that already own the past three editions. Why should roleplayers be different?
You underestimate the capacity for unlimited stupidity that mankind has ;)
Originally posted by Strephon Alkhalikoi
For if it were even close to the same game I play then it would be BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE, which it isn't.
It's about as backwards compatible with AD&D as AD&D is with OD&D. Of course, for all I know you call AD&D "Advanced Fantasy."
You underestimate the capacity for unlimited stupidity that mankind has
You may just be right about that;)
Originally posted by Serena DarkMyst
You may just be right about that;)
hm...
Kaihne is always right my, dear. The sooner you learn my ways, the sooner you can become a cleric of mine
OOC
I'm one of those stupid fools always buying warhammer, so I gotta know ;)
Originally posted by Strephon Alkhalikoi
If what you've written here is the BEST you can come up with, then you have a long way to go, especially coming from a mere woman.
Well, after reading that, any respect you might have earned goes out the window.
People who make sexist comments in lieu of reason only earn my contempt.
furhtermore, my wife read that, and she says that if you said that to her in real life, she would have clocked you. You really shouldn't say things that would get your rear end handed to you in real life on a message board.
And thinking one game is so offensive that it's very existance offends you is juvenile. That goes for 3E haters and OOP haters as well, I think both you guys are pretty sad, for the record.
Like you said, respect is earned, not given. you have not earned my respect for your sexist tones and the fact you have such strong opinions on what game I like to play.
I happen to frequent these boards at times because I am a collector of old games, they fascinate me, even though I currently own more games than I ever could play, given my schedule. You people give us nostalgic types a bad name, and I would like it if you perhaps got over the fact they made a new edition, and move on with your life. No game is worth the grief that you have obviously gone through. WotC is not at your door to take your old books away, you can still play the old games.
If juvenile whining and ranting is all you are capable of, you are of no consequence to me.
I did report the guy who was so darn offensive, we'll see what happens after that.
Originally posted by Count Arioch the 28th
Go right ahead. I have nothing to fear from being reported, I don't think I have broken the CoC in any way, shape or form.
Arioch.....I wasnt referring to you...lol....no, I was referring to the sexist pig that you had actually stood up to. Thanks for that btw...made me feel good thats for sure.
Originally posted by Serena DarkMyst
I did report the guy who was so darn offensive, we'll see what happens after that.
Since I started this thread and it got a bit out of hand, I have reported the same post. Maybe a mod will edit it on Monday?
Originally posted by Serena DarkMyst
I certainly hope that this forum is moderated. I believe that Jedi is the mod here and he does a great job on the DL board, which is where I do the lion's share of my posting.
I did report the guy who was so darn offensive, we'll see what happens after that.
No, it's sad but this forum is not moderated because the staff doesn't care anyway.
A quick search on the mod profile will reveal the number of appearance is very very small. I succeded at bringing the mod here once because I complained at Wotc staff directly and if I recall correctly, it was his first coming...
Another search will reveal an abominable and enormous number of posts that should have been moderated but did not.
Seriously put, do you think Wotc would put a lot of emphasis on an OOP forum ? No more money there... ;)
They should give the mod job of this forum to someone who have a passion for OOP AD&D/D&D. Then, and only then, you would get a REAL moderation.
What I say is if they don't care to do a good job about this forum, then they should remove it completely because an unmoderated forum like the OOP, where edition wars is the #1 topic, is a place where rise conflicts all the time.
If we only had the interested people visiting, everything would be fine, but some people feel the need to come in and try to prove that their game is the best, much like we used to do when we were youngs lads and playing in the schoolyard.
My poorly bound 3e books are falling apart after 3 years of light use. Sorry, Wizzes, these books look pretty but they are inferior, shoddy merchandise.
My AD&D 1e books have been used extremely hard and the college textbook company that printed them on rag stock and bound them did a great job, because those books are indestructible.
Too bad about the sexist insult.
Serena, I must ask, with no intent of offending:
I have not read any of your posts elsewhere on these boards, so I might have a mistaken picture of you.
Please excuse me if I do.
From reading your posts in this thread, I am curious.
Like several posters on the OOP boards, you seem to like your 3e, and you don't express a lot of fondness for the old editions.
What draws you here, then?
Drexlorn, why not petition directly to WotC to let you moderate this forum ;)
Or maybe Count Arioch...
That would be a better solution, then to shut this board down, just because I sometimes feel the need to proof my lack of balls by flaming everyone on an unmoderated board...
Originally posted by OlafTheUnbathed
Here's how I know:
Too bad about the sexist insult.
Serena, I must ask, with no intent of offending:
I have not read any of your posts elsewhere on these boards, so I might have a mistaken picture of you.
Please excuse me if I do.
From reading your posts in this thread, I am curious.
Like several posters on the OOP boards, you seem to like your 3e, and you don't express a lot of fondness for the old editions.
What draws you here, then?
Too true. I am a hardcore 3e player. But I started in older editions....and 3e peeps can like it or not.....the better stories were written in older editions.
And to be completely honest, I am not one of those who is separatist about editions....I like it all. To me...its all D&D.
These days the game and the people I know through it are all I have.....so I hold on with both hands and a grappling hook.....and a spiked chain in 3e ;)
I try to check out everyones opinions....which is why I go to this forum.
There is a brand of stealth troll who comes here waving the all-editions flag but is really just here to poke the old bears with a stick.
I won't count you among them.
Originally posted by Serena DarkMyst
These days the game and the people I know through it are all I have.....so I hold on with both hands and a grappling hook.....and a spiked chain in 3e ;)
hm...
Sounds a little sad to me
@ Olaf the unbathed:
I like that idea about poking some old bears with a stick
*poke*
*poke*
*poke*
Oh, missed out on that stealth part... Well, everyone has to start somewhere...
And I have to agree (sadly) on the point of poor workmanship with the new books.
While they look beautiful (thats a matter of personal taste of course), they aren't durable...
Heck, some of my AD&D and D&D Books are older than me and have been heavily used, but look better than my 1 year old 3E PHB
Originally posted by Kaihne
hm...
Sounds a little sad to me
It is....trust me....it is
But thats why I come here...it's fun here
Originally posted by Serena DarkMyst
...I was referring to the sexist [person]....
Yeah, that was the one I was referring to too when I mentioned the boards not being moderated anymore.
This is the OOP board, not the sexist remarks board.
Originally posted by Kaihne
hm...
Drexlorn, why not petition directly to WotC to let you moderate this forum ;)
Already done but looks like it was not accepted. ;)
And I don't think they would hire me because I'm too fanatic about the older editions. Really, I could harm their marketing forum...errr...their forums I mean.
If I had the scepter of power here, I would bring a lot of changes.
The first notable would be of no edition comparing and no 3.0 and 3.5 reference never, only speech of the previous versions. Second would be more subdivisions inside.
Then the forum would finally have a name who is at least, really representative, instead of a dirty backyard.
Not that I hate the new version, but an OOP forum should be OOP, like 3e forum should be 3e. To each king his crown and land.
And for those wondering, I currently play in a campaign in 3.0 run by a friend, one of my ex-player in my 4 years 2nd ed AD&D campaign who just finished 4 months ago.
I'm currently studying 1st edition wich I'll probably use in my next campaign, provided I like it.
I also played some sessions with the basic set rules (Moldvay) for my girlfriend's daughter.
So, I play and know about almost all versions of the game and can understand everyone language.
I have OOP books that are nearly as old as I am that are still in pretty good shape. (A little worn from use, the covere's are a bti faded, but it's still in good working order.)
I got the 3E PHB the day it came out, and the pages are falling out, the nice plastic cover has started to rip exposing the cardboard underneath, the spine itself has ripped away from the pages (I guess that's a very good argument against those heavy glossy pages, my old books aren't glossy, and they are holding up just fine.)
Definately, the old books were built much better than they currently are. But to be honest, that applies to everything under the sun, it's not a WotC problem, it's a world problem, no one gives a crap anymore to make a durable product these days.
Anybody know of a forum where OOP and 3.xE are discussed and compared in a friendly manner? A place where one could go to ask, "How do/did you convert Y to X?"
Yeah, I know a place. It's called "Fantasy Land".
It really is the only place I know of where you can discuss how to convert something from one edition into another without it descending into an edition war. Seriously.
Originally posted by Halaster-Blackcloak
It really is the only place I know of where you can discuss how to convert something from one edition into another without it descending into an edition war. Seriously.
My "Basic D&D d20" thread over on dragonsfoot.org hasn't even come close to descending into an edition war.
It's just a fact.
WOTC should do one of three things.
1. If they don't care about the OOP board, then just delete it. There are plent of better OOP forums elsewhere anyway.
2. Leave it unmoderated, label it as such, and to hell with it. Let people fight it out the good old fashioned way, anything goes, last man standing wins.
3. Ban all this 3E garbage that CONSTANTLY gets posted here and force the forum to maintain its OOP subject matter.
And this part I say in a non-accusatory tone (though people should feel free to be offended by it since some will regardless
):Why do some of you 3E gamers come here to fight about OOP editions? Why do you care what a bunch of grognards have to say about 3E? That's like a Democrat going into a Republican convention to argue. Why bother? 3E gamers who post stuff in the OOP section saying they think 3E is better are just asking for trouble, period. So why bother? Aren't you happy with all the 3E forums you have? You know that many OOP gamers utterly DESPISE 3E, d20, and everything about it. Does WOTC pay you to defend them? Isn't that a lost battle to begin with? Why do some of you care so much?
Either way, I don't care. It's fun sometimes just to sit back and watch the fireworks.
My "Basic D&D d20" thread over on dragonsfoot.org hasn't even come close to descending into an edition war.
True, but there have been plenty of flame wars there, unlike at Mortality.
The forum IS moderated. Jedi only has four hours per week to moderate all the boards he has. If anyone has a problem, they should first try to contact him, and failing that, contact me.
I don't know if anyone contacted him, but I can say that my mailbox doesn't have any complaints about/from this board.
WotC does care about it's gamers. Let's be clear about that. No, they're not publishing old material anymore, and no, there is no money to be made from it. (It's a company. It's goal is to make money.) Ford would make no money if it mass produced the Model T car again. Sure, there would be a small core group of die hard fans and collectors, but for practical everyday use, it would be a flop.
If they/we didn't care, there wouldn't be an OOP forum at all.
Almost inevitably in any situation, the WizOs will side with 3E and against OOP because the people holding their leashes own WOTC.
Please don't spread falsehoods around. You know that's not true. WizOs "side" with the Code of Conduct and issue warnings/bans to those who violate it.
And let's not turn this in to a "board war". It's unnecessary.
The forum IS moderated. Jedi only has four hours per week to moderate all the boards he has.
Whose fault is that? Bottom line, WOTC should have enough WizOs to manage all its forums, and if they don't they should hire more. Four hours per week is hardly enough time to manage ONE forum, much less several forums. Do you truly believe that the perception that the OOP boards here are unmoderated exists in a vacuum with no basis in reality? SOMETHING causes that perception.
WotC does care about it's gamers. Let's be clear about that
Its 3E gamers, yes, because that's where all their money is coming from. We can agree there. OOP gamers are not WOTC's gamers, they don't support WOTC (at least many of them don't). I'm not criticizing them for that, it's just a fact of life. Why should they care about OOP gamers who are not buying their product anyway? That's just common sense. I just object to them PRETENDING they care.
No, they're not publishing old material anymore, and no, there is no money to be made from it. (It's a company. It's goal is to make money.) Ford would make no money if it mass produced the Model T car again. Sure, there would be a small core group of die hard fans and collectors, but for practical everyday use, it would be a flop.
God knows, they made money selling all those ESDs! They can still make a nice chunk of cash off OOP gamers if they treated them with respect.
If they/we didn't care, there wouldn't be an OOP forum at all.
I'm sorry, but I just don't buy that. Ever since 3E first came out, there's been a definite anti-OOP, pro-3E bias here, even on the OOP boards. I'm not the only one who believes this, there are plenty of others who see the same thing. We're not just imagining it or making it up. That perception exists due to certain actions (or lack thereof) taken by WOTC and its WizOs.
Please don't spread falsehoods around. You know that's not true. WizOs "side" with the Code of Conduct and issue warnings/bans to those who violate it.
I won't continue to belabor the point after this, but I don't see it that way, and plenty of people agree with me. There's always been and continues to be a palpable bias towards 3E, even here on the OOP board. It was actually better when 3E was not allowed to be discussed on the OOP board. Every flame war and fight still starts out due to someone either stepping into the OOP board to say that 3E is better (which is nothing more than picking a fight no matter how you cut it), or someone who plays 3E going ballistic because someone in the OOP board says they hate 3E. That makes no sense. And it's been allowed to happen and is still happening almost 4 years later. Nothing has changed, the way I and others see it.
And let's not turn this in to a "board war". It's unnecessary.
Definitely not my intent. Besides, Adlon would kick my ass for that in the first place.
I'm just stating a fact...that there are no flame wars allowed at Mortality. We simply don't allow these "3E is better/No it isn't...you're a moron" arguments to break out. Hell, there was a time when, during a discussion of 3E and 2E matters, Adlon spanked my bottom publicly for getting a little too aggressive in my arguments. Even being a moderator, that did not exclude me from adhering to the rules. People who are die hard 3E fans have no business trolling an OOP forum or going there tooting the 3E trumpet. That's just asking for trouble, and anyone with an ounce of common sense should know that.
Not being snide, I honestly think you'd be a good mod of these boards.
I agree with most of what you said. (Except the 3E sucks part.) I play 3E. I don't go around trying to start fights with people here, people here have helped me out track down rare gaming stuff in the past, I'm not about to bite the hand that feeds me.
(Plus, there's a metric crapload of 3E forums here, they might be better for 3E comments.)
Hey halastor, have you ever applied to be a mod? Not being snide, I honestly think you'd be a good mod of these boards.
Thanks!
I've thought about it.
But considering the history I have with WOTC, and the fact that I've gotten into ******* contests with virtually every WizO here, and have butting heads with them more times than I can count, I think they'd view it as giving the fox the keys to the hen house!
:D
Besides, I have my hands full with work, school, moderating the OOP boards at Mortality, and running the Back In Print Project. So even if I was allowed, I doubt I'd have the time.
Yeah, not to mention that he's also have to watch some of the other forums as well, I'm sure he wouldn't want to. (At any rate, the RPG team is full at this time.) - Paradox
I don't come here to pick fights with the "great old ones"...
Maybe just poke 'em with a stick sometimes, to see if they are still alive :D
No, seriously.
This board is far too useful to be deleted. After all, I can get help from people, who DM more years, than I have lived, without having to be a member of 50 message boards...
I like it the way it is and after all, if no one would react to 3E'ers wanting to start a flame war, they wouldn't errupt.
Someone must have fun at these games, or they wouldn't take place ;)
@ Drexlorn: Ok, perhaps it's better this way then
Americans today have alot of disposable income. Look how much gas prices have gone up. It hasn't stop people from going to the pumps.
I know RPGs are different, but look how many companies and products are out there already.
I applaud anyone who sticks to their edition and resists the temptation!!
Several online services that are selling old games in pdf form stopped getting any and all old products of the D&D lines (whatever old edition) as soon as WotC bought it all. This is yet one more little thing they are doing to stamp out older editions of the game. I don't for a moment believe they are trying to "rid the world of it" but they sure as heck aren't going to support it and they don't want to see you spend your money on ebay, online sites, old gaming shops, etc unless it's on their 3e items. I can't say I blame them as a large company (that's how companies get large and why TSR no longer exists, they cared) but it's still a sad thing.
My one real reason why OD&D is better than 3e then? Simply for the fact that those games were published by TSR and not WotC (which is owned by an even larger company after all).
I'd also like to chime in on the "3e is not D&D" subject and while I will not defend any sexist comments I have to say that I agree with that statement. It goes under the same name and it even has some of the same concepts but 3e has almost nothing functional in common with 2e, 1e, basic, or original D&D. What's worse, is that it has a great deal of content, rules, and devices, designed to be very different from those old games and claims that older editions are as outdated and unsellable as the Ford Model T. Now that's about as foolish a statement as I've ever heard, here or anywhere else.
I won't make huge lists, or fully go into the differences of those games because that's been done to death and it, frankly, makes little sense. But for the sake of baking up my statements with thoughts and not insults I'll mention a few small concepts.
Older editions fostered group play and the need to have your fellow party members around. Older editions kept the game at a slow even pace that helped your campaigns last for a good long time but gave you the excitment of advancing to bigger and better things (this is especially true of basic). Older editions were also not video games on paper. Third edition is built (this part was sated by Monte Cook himself) to be both very simple and to take the majority of the power and ability to make rules calls out of the DM's hands. I, for one, find both of those core ideas of 3e to be the wrong way to go. Finally (this has not been stated by any WotC writer, staff member, etc that I know of, but it's pretty obvious never the less), 3e is built to be more like a video game than a roleplaying game. It appeals to those same people who enjoy D1, D2, NWN, Everquest, etc. In those games the individual is the important factor and the group is just a way to get more than two people per campaign to buy the WotC books. Many 3e DMs overcome this obstible so don't take my meaning to be that 3e can't be well played, that's far from what I'm saying! Very simply, 3e doesn't lend itself to being well played or well DMed. The same creative ability that 3e DMs are putting into "overcoming" the weaknesses of 3e used to be put into coming up with those exellent adventures that even 3e players love so much.
All editions are viable, all editions bring us together under one roof (even if some of us don't think of 3e as D&D) and I even play a little bit of every edition (no, not mixture games, but a campaign in just about every edition) myself. So, I'll back Serena on this....we should all lay down our verbal weapons and get back to what brought us here in the first place, enjoyment of the game! Happy gaming.
Originally posted by Halaster-Blackcloak
Ever since 3E first came out, there's been a definite anti-OOP, pro-3E bias here, even on the OOP boards. I'm not the only one who believes this, there are plenty of others who see the same thing. We're not just imagining it or making it up. That perception exists due to certain actions (or lack thereof) taken by WOTC and its WizOs.
There are plenty of anti 3.xE sentiments around, too. As someone who painfully straddles the edition fence I end up fending off attacks from all sides, and I have to say (though it could be due to relative traffic) I see as many or more of the anti-3.xE sentiments flung around as the anti-OOP sentiments...
(Of course, I'm also in a 2E game with a DM who wouldn't know GURPS from 3.xE and he keeps directing aside comments at me like "You can't do anything in 3E unless you have the proper feat" and "Feats are superpowers" so perhaps I'm particularly on edge in that regard ;) )
Anyone starting a thread like this one has to know that people are going to jump in with opposing viewpoints. And its fun for both sides, or they wouldn't be posting.
But the real work gets done here in threads like my Keep on the Borderlands thread and the other threads that are people asking honest questions rather than initiating edition arguments.
I haven't been here long enough to get in o the discussion of how WotC feels about OOP, or how this board is moderated, but I can say one thing:
If you don't feed the trolls they starve to death or move to different hunting grounds.
If, when someone shows up trying to deride your favorite edition, you simply ignore that person's posts, soon there will be no more people posting things like that here. Of course, it doesn't help to have your own threads about how 3.x sucks, as those are just big neon signs screaming out "edition wars welcome here."
Originally posted by Serena DarkMyst
If you want respect from those who play D&D 3e you sure as hell better respect them.
(Snips the stream of consciousness drek you pass off as intelligent conversation and edits the remainder to be more legible).
That statement makes you sound about as piggish as an orc. It's also inflammatory and rude. I posted valid comments on a post without resorting to insulting the poster. Is there some reason you could not? I didnt deserve that disdainful, and flat out nasty comment. Consider yourself reported.
Oh...really....I have your permission even....
sheesh.....could you be any more pompous?
I could care less what you do. It only shows me how pathetic Men have become if they end up being conditioned to fear the words of a woman. Since I do not fear you, I can see the action for what it is, and you hold no power over me.
Now, I have to wonder where in this politically correct and emasculated society we live in it became fashionable to take umbrage over things our forefathers never had an issue with? I'm sorry, because I forgot that I am living in the 21st Century, on Earth, in the United States. I'm not living in the 18th or 19th Century on Earth, nor am I living on the planet Gor with my slave attending my every whim. In a very short time though, the Earthly equivalent of that Gorean life will happen for real.
I'll spell it out for you...and maybe you'll get it. If not, well it's really of little concern to me as I subscribe to the natural order of things on Earth, rather than an artificial construct created out of some need to provide equality to that which is inherently unequal.
You are not my equal. It's this concept of equality that has brought Man to this emasculated state, where he cowers in fear of offending those who truly aren't his equal. It is because of this concept of equality and a desire to not offend anyone that Man has effectively surrendered his right to dominance over those of lesser stature.
I refuse to surrender that birthright. EVER!
But to be honest, that applies to everything under the sun, it's not a WotC problem, it's a world problem, no one gives a crap anymore to make a durable product these days.
No, sir.
I understand the sentiment but it is erroneous.
The Wizards are responsible for the quality of their product, irrespective of the overall idiocy of anyone or everyone else in business.
Period.
No excuses.
Back to the sandlot rumble:
Well, with that last post we're going to find out if the self-styled politically-correct, moral-relativist defenders-of-diversity will put their money where their mouths are and embrace a new hue in the world rainbow by accepting Mr. Alkhalikoi's philosophy as yet another valid lifestyle and viewpoint.
But I'm not counting on it.
Time and again the PC crew only embraces only those who are on their own side of the sociopolitical spectrum, giving the lie to their pretty mission statement of inclusion.
I've had more problems with FASA and White Wolf books in that depatment then I've ever had with D&D books (of any edition).
Originally posted by OlafTheUnbathed
Back to the sandlot rumble:
Well, with that last post we're going to find out if the self-styled politically-correct, moral-relativist defenders-of-diversity will put their money where their mouths are and embrace a new hue in the world rainbow by accepting Mr. Alkhalikoi's philosophy as yet another valid lifestyle and viewpoint.
But I'm not counting on it.
Time and again the PC crew only embraces only those who are on their own side of the sociopolitical spectrum, giving the lie to their pretty mission statement of inclusion.
Well....I agree that his worldview is a valid one for him to have...Its when he starts in on people telling them that they are not his equals....And that he has a right of dominance over others. This is where the line should be drawn. I can accept his world views, but when he tells me that he has a right of dominance over me then he has another thing coming.
You are not my equal. It's this concept of equality that has brought Man to this emasculated state, where he cowers in fear of offending those who truly aren't his equal. It is because of this concept of equality and a desire to not offend anyone that Man has effectively surrendered his right to dominance over those of lesser stature.
This is utter crap. No one has any right of dominace over me...Especially pigs like this.
Originally posted by James McMurray
My first post here ever was asking how to convert and run something. I got some fairly useful responses. So to those that ask "where can you go to ask how to convert X to Y" I say "right here."
Asking questions about how to convert OOP products to 3E is off topic in the OOP forum. Doing the conversions requires a working knowledge of the 3e rules, which puts such topics squarely in the realm of the 3e forums, NOT OOP!
To go with the old bear theme, it's sadly like hearing grandpa's stories about how he fought NAZIs in WWII, and then getting a scowl when you ask him if he'll teach you how to fight.
If the industry statistics are to be believed, a significant number of the people playing 3e have played previous editions of the game, so there shouldn't be any lack of people posting and reading in the 3e forums who can help with conversions.
Coming to the OOP forum to ask about converting something to 3e makes about as much sense as going to the 3e forums to ask people the best way to convert a 3e adventure to 1st edition.
The old-schoolers are right: 3e doesn't belong here.
There needs to be a different board for cross-pollination/conversion/peace, love & dope.
I'd like to see everyone at least stay civil in here, but I am resigned to the fact that the camps have been formed, the lines drawn, and in spite of all good intentions this situation is set in stone.
I get irritated and make posts, then come back later and read them again, and I think, Jeez, I'm being a dick.
Then I re-read posts by the stealth-trolls and Wizbro shills, and think, Jeez, what a bunch of dolts, I wasn't hard enough on them.
Nice posters get chewed up in the crossfire.
The Wizzes need to split the board.
(But I think that's probably due to the fact that the boards aren't split!)