* * * Wizards Community Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : OOP Conversions forum. Thanks. Started at 08-06-04 11:51 PM by blackprinceofmuncie Visit at http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=289133 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : blackprinceofmuncie Date : 08-06-04 11:51 PM Thread Title : OOP Conversions forum. Thanks. I would have posted this to the appropriate thread, except for the lockage. I just wanted to respond to WizO_Paradox's statement: I certainly don't hate OOP editions, or the people on this board. Let's not forget the good we've done for the board. Although we didn't get a conversion board, I did make a full hearted attempt to get one put up. If it were my personal playground, we would have already had it within a week it was suggested. Now, why didn't I post an announcement? I had a pretty good idea what the response would be. I saw that the board was being asked about, and was trying to find the best way to break the bad news. Rather than wait too long, I had Catoblepas mention it. I'm responding specifically to the underlined part. What, exactly, did you expect the response to be? Personally, my response to a promptly posted announcement declaring that the powers that be have nixed the idea of a conversion board would have been a mixture of disappointment, mild frustration and gratitude that you at least tried. Following that, I probably would have asked if there were any other options that would take conversion threads (in the OOP -> IP direction) to another forum. Since you've declared that future conversion threads like that will be moved to the "What's a DM to do" forum (and I'm more than happy with that solution) it looks like the problem has been solved. After posting a thread inquiring about the status of the conversion board in Meta and getting a polite but not particularly informative response, it would actually have been very welcome to just receive an honest and thorough explanation of the status of the idea, no matter what the outcome. So, in the future, I would suggest not worrying too much about "the best way to break the bad news". I think most of us will just appreciate the WizOs being honest with us and keeping us informed. So I guess what I'm basically saying is...Thank you. Thanks for putting the idea forward, thanks for letting us know what happened and thanks for coming up with a different but workable solution when the original idea didn't work out. :) BTW - I know this is probably a thread more suited for the Meta forum, but we all know what happens to OOP forum threads that end up in Meta. :rolleyes: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : WizO_Catoblepas Date : 08-07-04 12:15 AM Well, we'll leave this one here. ;) At any rate, I know Paradox really tried to get such a board. And it really isn't like we've had the new for a long time. I asked Paradox and asked him if I could announce it on the board. After that, you know the rest. We're like everyone else - sometimes we, as WizOs, get what we want, sometimes we don't. For example, we were able to follow through on your suggestion for a thread on online locations for OoP material. However, we weren't able to get the Conversion board. As Doxxie mentioned, we'll just move the conversions to the appropriate 3rd edition boards. Race/Classes to the Race and Classes board; modules to the What's a DM to Do board. However, I would be lieing if I said I was not a little upset since we're not getting a Conversion board. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : Incenjucar Date : 08-07-04 12:51 AM Thanks for trying. Hopefully, if nothing else, this will end the Conspiracy theories. At least those aimed at the hard-working WizOs. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : Algolei Date : 08-07-04 07:44 PM How come something always blows up whenever I go away for two weeks? :) I am glad that: Things have been worked out; something final has been decided; we know where to go for our conversion questions; and I wasn't here to whine during the explosive period. :D P.S. Thanks to whoever deserves and/or needs it. (If I knew who that was, I'd make particular mention, but so far I'm dangling amidst a pit of confusion.) (Can you dangle amidst a pit?) (How about in a pit?) (Maybe I'm dangling in a pit of confusion then.) (There's definitely confusion. And I feel all dangly. Plus I sense some sort of pit-like feature.) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : WizO_Catoblepas Date : 08-07-04 09:38 PM Like Paradox said in another post, he'll keep trying to ask for a new conversion board in the future. Hey, the worst that they can tell us is no, and we already have that. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : vader42xx Date : 08-08-04 02:22 AM I'd like to throw in my thanks for trying as well. :) And not sure if this is really on topic but I didn't want to start another conversion board thread. Thanks for the edited apology thread first of all. And, secondly, please don't ban 3e topics here. I'd have rather had a conversion board as well but since that's not going to happen I don't see the problem with 3e players asking a question or two. With no conversion board this really is the best place to ask and most of them don't spam or act at all impolite. I don't know, maybe I'm odd, but they're fellow gamers AND interested in the older editions so I see no reason in giving them a hand. Besides that, I'm not big on having to totally keep my mouth shut about 3e. I don't like flame or edition wars but I like to be able to talk about it when there's a good reason. :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : Algolei Date : 08-09-04 05:52 AM Originally posted by vader42xx ...please don't ban 3e topics here. Arrrg! *hair starts falling out in clumps again* ...they're fellow gamers AND interested in the older editions so I see no reason in giving them a hand. You probably meant "no problem in giving them a hand" or "no reason in giving them a hard time." :smirk: But I liked that sentence when I read it the first time. Just a little. I confess. Besides that, I'm not big on having to totally keep my mouth shut about 3e. I don't like flame or edition wars but I like to be able to talk about it when there's a good reason. :) Okay, now stop talking sense or I'll have to agree with you. I don't mind talking about 3E, but I tend to say bad things about it and then someone else agrees vehemently and then the flamewars begin. I can't help it! The whole 3.xE is a stupid system and *mmph-mmfm-fmfmbmlmm!* (See?) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Author : havard Date : 08-09-04 07:23 AM Originally posted by Algolei I don't mind talking about 3E, but I tend to say bad things about it and then someone else agrees vehemently and then the flamewars begin. I can't help it! The whole 3.xE is a stupid system and *mmph-mmfm-fmfmbmlmm!* As someone who enjoys both OOP D&D and 3E, it pains me to listen to the constant bashing of the new version of the game, especially when much of it is based on lack of understanding of the rules or even misinformation about them. From the recent flamewars though, I've come to understand that defending 3e will result in provoking the people who (understandably) love OOP D&D. Apparently, there are alot of strong feelings on these matters, so it might be better to thread very lightly upon this subject if at all. It would probably make the most sense to allow conversions from 3e to OOP (A)D&D here and leave conversions going the other way for the d20 boards (rules or setting specific). I wish the feelings on this matter could have been more relaxed, but I think recent discussions have shown that they are not. Havard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Author : blackprinceofmuncie Date : 08-09-04 04:16 PM Originally posted by havard As someone who enjoys both OOP D&D and 3E, it pains me to listen to the constant bashing of the new version of the game, especially when much of it is based on lack of understanding of the rules or even misinformation about them. And this is the kind of comment that seems to touch off a lot of flame wars around here. It certainly gets under my skin. Making a broad statement that people's bad opinions of the 3e game stem from ignorance or lack of understanding is just a passive-aggressive way of saying "Your opinion is stupid. You don't know what you're talking about." Hello!......Rude! I would say at least 9 out of 10 posters to this board have given D&D 3e a try. Some of us (me, Algolei, diaglo to name a few) spent years playing/DMing the game. We're not uninformed in our opinions about 3e. When the 3e fans who visit this forum come to accept that someone can have an informed opinion about 3e that doesn't include liking it, I think we'll start having a much friendlier forum. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 10] Author : havard Date : 08-09-04 05:34 PM I'm sorry if my message came across that way. Like I said I am a fan of both 3e and OOP D&D. I dont particularily care for AD&D2nd Ed, but that is another story. Ofcourse, it is perfectly acceptable to dislike 3e and know what you are talking about. What I was referring to was simply specific comments made by a few posters during the flame war, that clearly indicated misconceptions about 3e. OTOH, it is possible that the comments seemed that way because they were written in anger, it was a flame war after all. But again, I totally accept people not liking 3e for good reasons, and I agree that bashing OE on account of 3e supposedly being better should not be accepted on the boards. Then again, lashing out at any game or edition of game should IMHO be avoided since it does provoke people who love that particular game. What could be accepted is specific criticism of games or elements in the games, like "I think AD&D solves problem X better than 3e, but I think 3e does problem y better". But as this topic is obviously very sensitive to alot of people, any topic related to the quality of 3e should probably be avoided. It is a little frustrating, but I can live with it :) Hope that clarifies my statement, I certainly did not indend to provoke anyone further. :) Havard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 11] Author : vader42xx Date : 08-09-04 07:22 PM Guess that's what I get for posting so fast. :eek: But I'm glad you liked the sentence. :smirk: And, no, I don't see any reason to ban 3e talk as long as it's 3e talk that has something to do with an OoP edition. They're gamers too and there's no reason for me not to give them a hand. :) Edit: And you can add me to that list of those who gave 3e a try for years (both running and playing) before giving it up. :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 12] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-10-04 02:21 AM Originally posted by blackprinceofmuncie And this is the kind of comment that seems to touch off a lot of flame wars around here. It certainly gets under my skin. Making a broad statement that people's bad opinions of the 3e game stem from ignorance or lack of understanding is just a passive-aggressive way of saying "Your opinion is stupid. You don't know what you're talking about." Hello!......Rude! I would say at least 9 out of 10 posters to this board have given D&D 3e a try. Some of us (me, Algolei, diaglo to name a few) spent years playing/DMing the game. We're not uninformed in our opinions about 3e. When the 3e fans who visit this forum come to accept that someone can have an informed opinion about 3e that doesn't include liking it, I think we'll start having a much friendlier forum. My sentiments exactly. I own a ton of 3e stuff, and played the system for a couple of years (because 3e was the only game in town for awhile), but eventually had to return to my 1e/2e roots. If I had a nickle for every time a 3e enthusiast's eyes glazed over when I tried to explain why I came to decide to go back to 1e/2e, I'd be a rich guy. In my experience the partisans on boths sides usually cannot hear each other out and at least try to understand why they like/dislike different versions of the game. Criticism of a gaming system should lead to healthy debate and the betterment of the game. Part of the issue I think is the fact that OOPers know that their beloved OD&D, Basic, 1e, 2e incarnations of the game will most likely never be reprinted nor expanded upon, so for those who have come to really, really dislike 3e, they don't see the future of the game they've played for years and years holding anything for them. Thus there is angst that is generated as the OOP folks see the game they love being taken in directions they don't want it to be taken, and they come to feel that WotC has left them out in the cold. EDIT: And this is not just a matter of gaming materials either, as many people are diehard hobby enthusiasts and when they see the game going in directions they don't like, it makes them feel they are losing out on the community aspects of their hobby as there are less and less people willing to play the older editions. Its really quite the quandry for OOPers. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 13] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-10-04 02:52 AM Originally posted by havard As someone who enjoys both OOP D&D and 3E, it pains me to listen to the constant bashing of the new version of the game, especially when much of it is based on lack of understanding of the rules or even misinformation about them. From the recent flamewars though, I've come to understand that defending 3e will result in provoking the people who (understandably) love OOP D&D. Let me just say that this is not intended as a flame at all, nor to single you out to create tension, but merely as a means to help you understand where an OOPer may be coming from. What has to be understood is that many of us OOPers have been playing D&D in some form since the 1970's. Yep, thats 20-30 years for some of us. Many of us have the older editions practically memorized, or at least close enough that we could strike a gaming session from our heads without any books at all and with only a few dice, some paper, pencils etc. Along comes 3e. To many of us old schoolers, 3e is an animal, not of a different color, but of a different species. I'm not going to go into the specifics here as to why many of us think that, because thats been done to death in plenty of edition wars threads. But lets just say that many old schoolers look at 3e as a radical departure from the game we've known for decades. Now please, lets not argue whether 3e actually IS a radical departure from OOP D&D, lets just accept the fact that many OOPers believe (for many reason) that this is the case. Many, many (I'd even say most) old schoolers went out and bought at least the core rule books for 3e. Many, many of us tried the game, and after days/weeks/months/years of playing it, we decided we didn't like where this was taking the game as a whole. We have reasons why we don't like the game, as Blackprinceofmuncie pointed out. So, its not because we don't understand 3E, its that we don't care for it because many of us believe its a radical departure from what D&D was. Now if you throw in the general sense of alienation that I mentioned above in my response to Blackprinceofmuncie about how OOPers are feeling marginalized by WotC (whether thats intentional or not), perhaps that sheds some light on the general issues that come up between 3e folks and OOP folks. Many OOPers (but certainly not all, obviously) think that the game has taken a turn for the worse, and with the advent of d20 D&D it is highly unlikely that there will ever be a return to the versions of the game that they think were better incarnations. Also enter into the equation the fact that many new gamers came into the D&D fold with the advent of 3E, many of whom had never tried any of the other editions (either because they were too young, weren't interested, whatever). Many 3e enthusiats simply don't have the context that the old schoolers have in terms of the older editions of the game to understand why we often think that 3e is a radical departure (note I said many, not all or even most). Now of course, I'm generalizing here, because certainly there are many many 3e players who played other editions as well. However, its been my personal experience (admittedly anecdotal) that there were alot of new players that got turned onto D&D through 3rd edition who had never RPG'd before. Most of the people I played 3rd edition with were new to the game, (just my experience over the course of 2 years or so). Since they learned the game from the 3rd edition, they often (again in my experience) don't understand enough about the older editions to see our point of view. So essentially what I'm saying is that your statement can be turned on its head, at least to an extent. Namely, that there are also those 3e players who don't know enough about the older editions to understand where the old schoolers are coming from. Hopefully I've shed some light without the use of flame. :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 14] Author : Algolei Date : 08-10-04 02:54 AM Originally posted by havard As someone who enjoys both OOP D&D and 3E, it pains me to listen to the constant bashing of the new version of the game.... I'm sorry. I was trying to include a joke in my post, but even I can't find it in there now. (Maybe it was in the brackets?) (Nope. Still can't see it.) My bad. No flames intended. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 15] Author : havard Date : 08-10-04 11:39 AM Again, sorry if my post seemed to attribute ignorance or other negative traits to OOP gamers. As I said before, that is definately not what I was trying to say. Gandalt_Istari, thanks for the clarifying post. What you are saying makes alot of sense. I think you are right that there are more OOP gamers who are familiar with 3e than there are 3e gamers who are also familiar with 3e, so even though I havent seen it too much myself, I bet there is alot of 3e players who lash out at OOP D&D without knowing what they are talking about. Being a fan of an unsupported game or setting can be tough, I know. In fact most of my favorite games/settings are out of print. In this hobby it seems that you end up there pretty fast unless you always go for the most mainstream system/setting. In the previous debate I did however see people while lifting their general frustration about the whole situation criticizing 3e through examples that were clearly in error. There were references to feats that do not exist at least in the Core Books and clear misinterpretations of other rules. While I fully respect people's right to like system A and dislike system B, I in general prefer it if people do know what they are talking about. Due to the heat of the discussion, I decided to stop posting untill things had calmed down though. OTOH, you are undoubtedly right that most OOP gamers know what they are talking about and are familiar enough with 3e to have made up their own opinion of it based on facts rather than misconceptions. So what I was annoyed by was probably just a few individuals at this time. Again, thanks for the response :) Havard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 16] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-10-04 10:49 PM Originally posted by havard Again, sorry if my post seemed to attribute ignorance or other negative traits to OOP gamers. As I said before, that is definately not what I was trying to say. No problem at all, and I understood where you were coming from. Gandalt_Istari, thanks for the clarifying post. What you are saying makes alot of sense. I think you are right that there are more OOP gamers who are familiar with 3e than there are 3e gamers who are also familiar with 3e, so even though I havent seen it too much myself, I bet there is alot of 3e players who lash out at OOP D&D without knowing what they are talking about. I'm glad I was able to get across what I meant without being flaming about it, heh. :) Being a fan of an unsupported game or setting can be tough, I know. In fact most of my favorite games/settings are out of print. In this hobby it seems that you end up there pretty fast unless you always go for the most mainstream system/setting. While I think that this may be true for many gaming systems, I don't think it was true for D&D pre-3E. Having made the transitions from the Basic game, to 1e, and eventually to some 2e, I truly had little to no problems moving from one system to the next. Certainly each of the new editions of Basic and AD&D became more complex and things that were different, but really I look on those transitions from Basic to 2n edition as being more of an expansion upon existing material, which meant that there was alot more continuity between the editions. This is where 3e made the fateful turn for the game as a whole IMO. There are of course many similar concepts that carry over from the earlier editions into 3e (HP, AC, characters, NPC's, adventures, saving throws, etc.), but the game mechanics took a new turn with the advent of d20 gaming. Now of couse people who played the old editions could make the transition, but the point here is that 3e made alot of changes and thus it became almost like learning an entirely new system. In the past, it was far easier I believe to move from Basic to 1e to 2e. For the most part, once a player understood hit points, saves, armor class, etc., they could sit down to a 1e game even though they had only played Basic before. Or they could play a 2e game even though they had only been previously exposed to 1e. With 3e came BAB, new multiclassing rules, a new skill system, feats, a new saving throw system, a new "to hit" system, a new way to figure armor class etc., as well as the whole d20 construct for the rules. Sure these things aren't incomprehensible 3e, especially for someone who has been around gaming for awhile, but they were certainly departures from what the game had been previously IMO. Thus, we see people constantly looking to convert stuff from the older editions to the newer and vice versa. What the solution is for the OOP gamers who wants to stick with older versions might be I honestly don't know, beyond fan-driven support. :( -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 17] Author : WizO_Catoblepas Date : 08-11-04 12:22 AM Originally posted by Gandalf_Istari What the solution is for the OOP gamers who wants to stick with older versions might be I honestly don't know, beyond fan-driven support. :( Well, that is why this board as well as numerous other OoP boards exist out on the internet. After all, there's nothing saying that you can't convert 3rd edition d20 OGL material over to the B/X/1E/2E format. And often the fan converted stuff is very good. At the very least, it gives you a good foundation to make your own adjustments for your campaign. As for 1E/2E players and 3rd edition player, I would tend to agree that there are more 1E/2E players that have tried 3rd edition than there have been 3rd edition players that have tried 1E/2E. I also do agree that this is a generalizaton, though often accurate. However, I guess that is still the biggest issue to me. Unless one really knows the individual they're holding the discussion with, one really doesn't know their background. They could fit in the mold layed out the generalization, but then again they may not. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 18] Author : Tenzhi Date : 08-11-04 01:33 AM Originally posted by Gandalf_Istari With 3e came BAB, new multiclassing rules, a new skill system, feats, a new saving throw system, a new "to hit" system, a new way to figure armor class etc., as well as the whole d20 construct for the rules. Some of that isn't really a big change. BAB/armor/to hit, for instance, is really just a different way to look at the same old THAC0 and AC system. Without limitations that existed in previous editions, however, the numbers tend to get a bit too ridiculous. It used to be rare to see an AC of -10 (AC30 in 3.xE), but now at high levels you're expected to have ACs between 32-40 (or even higher). Heck, the precursor to feats can be found in the Rules Cyclopedia in the form of Combat Maneuvers. Not that I'd say 3.xE didn't make some questionable changes (IMO the multi - or should I say dual - classing rules do suck (but can be replaced by Gestalt rules which are essentially 2E MC rules) and magic items have gotten out of hand, among other things), but some of the rules that are oft treated as alien aren't all that alien under closer examination. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 19] Author : Iddig Ap Nil Date : 08-11-04 01:40 AM Thread Title : Newly Returned to OoP... (A)D&D As the subject line says, I'm newly returned to OD&D, 1e, 2e, et al. I decided that running 3e, after sometime just wasn't my thing (Will play it though with the right group). But anyway, just want to say that I don't really care if WotC supports it or not, I've always gamed in homebrew stuff anyway, so everything I've used has been made up by me, or borrowed from other sources (I've run all of 4 published modules since I started DMing in 1985...). So, just thought I'd make my presence known, once again... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 20] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-11-04 02:33 AM Thread Title : Re: Newly Returned to OoP... (A)D&D Originally posted by Iddig Ap Nil As the subject line says, I'm newly returned to OD&D, 1e, 2e, et al. I decided that running 3e, after sometime just wasn't my thing (Will play it though with the right group). But anyway, just want to say that I don't really care if WotC supports it or not, I've always gamed in homebrew stuff anyway, so everything I've used has been made up by me, or borrowed from other sources (I've run all of 4 published modules since I started DMing in 1985...). So, just thought I'd make my presence known, once again... Welcome back! Always nice to know that there are people returning to the fold... :smirk: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 21] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-11-04 02:41 AM Originally posted by WizO_Catoblepas Well, that is why this board as well as numerous other OoP boards exist out on the internet. After all, there's nothing saying that you can't convert 3rd edition d20 OGL material over to the B/X/1E/2E format. And often the fan converted stuff is very good. At the very least, it gives you a good foundation to make your own adjustments for your campaign. These things are true, but only to a point I think. To my mind there are some things that would simply be very difficult to port over from 3e to OOP editions, e.g., the varied and often strange race/class/multiclass combos. In general I think you are right though that there are communities out there for OOP that will keep the flame alive, but overall I think a splintering of the community has come about that may never be fixed. JMO. As for 1E/2E players and 3rd edition player, I would tend to agree that there are more 1E/2E players that have tried 3rd edition than there have been 3rd edition players that have tried 1E/2E. I also do agree that this is a generalizaton, though often accurate. However, I guess that is still the biggest issue to me. Unless one really knows the individual they're holding the discussion with, one really doesn't know their background. They could fit in the mold layed out the generalization, but then again they may not. This is where I think honest disclosure comes in. A person who has never played an edition probably shouldn't spend much time talking about whats right or wrong about it. :) Also, often times I think a general sense of a person's gaming experience came come through given the information they put forward. In other words, if someone is comparing two editions, for example, usually its not too hard to figure out whether they have played both editions given the terminology they use and the level of knowledge they present about the game they are talking about. This of couse is also admittedly a generalization I am making. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 22] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-11-04 02:52 AM Originally posted by Tenzhi Some of that isn't really a big change. BAB/armor/to hit, for instance, is really just a different way to look at the same old THAC0 and AC system. Without limitations that existed in previous editions, however, the numbers tend to get a bit too ridiculous. It used to be rare to see an AC of -10 (AC30 in 3.xE), but now at high levels you're expected to have ACs between 32-40 (or even higher). I think that you hit upon a key here of what I meant when including BAB, the new armor system etc. as being big changes to the way things worked in OOP. Its not just so much the math end of it, but the fact that the whole notion of limitations has fallen by the wayside I believe (which was really what I was getting at in my comments). JMO. Heck, the precursor to feats can be found in the Rules Cyclopedia in the form of Combat Maneuvers. Thats why I said that there are concepts carried over from previous editions. I'm just of the view that they don't necessarily mean what they did in previous editions. In other words, same concepts or terms, but different meaning. Not that I'd say 3.xE didn't make some questionable changes... but some of the rules that are oft treated as alien aren't all that alien under closer examination. Well, I have some views on this that I'm not going to get into here because this is supposed to a flame free board, and so as much as I'd love getting into particulars I won't because no matter how well I might couch my language in polite terms I know there's always a flame right around the corner. :angel: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 23] Author : Tenzhi Date : 08-11-04 03:15 AM Originally posted by Gandalf_Istari Its not just so much the math end of it, but the fact that the whole notion of limitations has fallen by the wayside I believe (which was really what I was getting at in my comments). JMO. :nods: At first I thought that the lack of limitations in certain regards (ability scores, for instance) was a good thing, but after awhile I wasn't so sure. I'd almost be inclined to cap ability modifiers at +5 for the most part (notable exceptions being damage, initiative, and bonus HP) and possibly add in some of the special abilities from the Wrath of the Immortals set for higher ability scores. (Do pardon my rambling - I've been rewriting d20 D&D for awhile now and I tend to occasionally think "out loud" as it were.) I have a feeling we might agree on as many points as we would disagree about 3.xE. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 24] Author : havard Date : 08-11-04 04:21 PM Originally posted by Tenzhi Some of that isn't really a big change. BAB/armor/to hit, for instance, is really just a different way to look at the same old THAC0 and AC system. Without limitations that existed in previous editions, however, the numbers tend to get a bit too ridiculous. It used to be rare to see an AC of -10 (AC30 in 3.xE), but now at high levels you're expected to have ACs between 32-40 (or even higher). It may have been rare to see AC -10 in AD&D, but RC D&D had a bunch of that. And using the Immortals rules ability scores go to 100, rather than just 18. If you wanna talk high power fantasy, Menzter/RC D&D is the way to go. Personally, I've always loved that :) Havard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 25] Author : Tenzhi Date : 08-11-04 08:08 PM Originally posted by havard And using the Immortals rules ability scores go to 100, rather than just 18. Indeed - I love the Wrath of the Immortals boxed set which features those ability scores. They went all the way up to 100 and the ability bonus maxed out at +20 (as opposed to, say, +45). And of course, mortals still retained their much lower limits. Such mortal limits are important, I think. Limitations on ability scores, limitations on bonuses, limitations on level advancement... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from Wizards Community (http://forums.gleemax.com) at 05-10-08 08:19 AM.