* * * Wizards Community Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : What did they take out of 0e that they put back into 3.x? Started at 08-16-07 02:09 PM by asdfff Visit at http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=907120 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : asdfff Date : 08-16-07 02:09 PM Thread Title : What did they take out of 0e that they put back into 3.x? I've always thought that 3.x 'felt' more like 0e and than 2e, but I could never really put my finger on it. Can someone help? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : chatdemon Date : 08-16-07 06:19 PM Thread Title : Re: What did they take out of 0e that they put back into 3.x? I've always thought that 3.x 'felt' more like 0e and than 2e, but I could never really put my finger on it. Can someone help? Rules wise, 3.x has almost nothing in common with OD&D. A game's "feel" is more related to how a DM and players play it, not how it's written. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : havard Date : 08-17-07 09:27 AM Thread Title : Re: What did they take out of 0e that they put back into 3.x? Rules wise, 3.x has almost nothing in common with OD&D. A game's "feel" is more related to how a DM and players play it, not how it's written. I always felt that 2e was a step down on the heroism that was allowed for in Classic (and possible 1e). IMO some of that was brought back with 3e. Classic and 3E are more geared towards above 20th level play. I could also see some similarities between Weapon Mastery and Feats, although there are big differences between them. Also, Prestige Classes could be seen as a continuation of the high level options (Paladin, Avenger, Druid etc) from BECMI as much as it is an evaluation of Kits from 2e. Just a couple of thoughts. Havard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : Oxlar Date : 08-19-07 01:43 PM Thread Title : Re: What did they take out of 0e that they put back into 3.x? 3rd + edition is just a video game on paper. It sucked the soul right out of AD&D. It works fine for CRPG stuff but it seems so empty/modular/mechanical. Everything is boiled down to a set of feats, EVERYTHING!! There is no wonderment in creature uniqueness. You could just as easily make a program that created a random set of feats and then generate a name. Viola!!! New monster. Monster has feats # 8,15,45, and 51. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : havard Date : 08-19-07 02:50 PM Thread Title : Re: What did they take out of 0e that they put back into 3.x? 3rd + edition is just a video game on paper. It sucked the soul right out of AD&D. It works fine for CRPG stuff but it seems so empty/modular/mechanical. Everything is boiled down to a set of feats, EVERYTHING!! There is now wonderment in creature uniqueness. You could just as easily make a program that created a random set of feats and then generate a name. Viola!!! New monster. Monster has feats # 8,15,45, and 51. You are entitled to your opinion ofcourse, but I disagree. 3e has its flaws, but I find nothing soul-less about it. And for the record many creatures still have unique abilities even if some abilities are available to several clases/creatures. Havard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : migo Date : 08-21-07 04:42 AM Thread Title : Re: What did they take out of 0e that they put back into 3.x? 3e is designed that it works very well in a computer, the nature of something being designed in a way that it's easily interpretable by a computer means it'll be a bit harder to interpret for a human. A lot of the "soul sucking" in 3.x comes from rules interactions being based on the mechanics and not as much what makes sense. Grapple rules being a perfect example, if they were designed in a way that was logical, then it would create problems of being able to move farther, so people would use grapple to move extra distance. That isn't wanted so the steps are done in a counter-intuitive order. This means you have to check the rules when you do something, instead of being able to do what "feels right" which is possible in Original D&D which had much less codified rules. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : Yorlum Date : 08-22-07 09:11 AM Thread Title : Re: What did they take out of 0e that they put back into 3.x? To me, it is more the frame of reference. 0/1 ed games developed PCs that were based upon Fantasy Literature. 3.X develops PCs that are based upon PC/Video games. in a 3rd ed game, one pc can 'have it all' just like a 'toon in a video game, complete with power-ups. 1st ed characters are left more nebulous... How many languages could Conan Speak? How good at riding a horse was the Grey Mouser? You didn't know the parts that the books didn't cover, and it was left to the player's imagination and the DM's discretion to define what was reasonable given a class/race/level. In 3rd ed, as many attributes as could be conceived of were codified and enumerated. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Author : spyone Date : 08-24-07 02:34 AM Thread Title : Re: What did they take out of 0e that they put back into 3.x? Half-Orcs, for one. Assassin, for another, IIRC. There was a lot of stuff that got removed for second edition that, in the opinion of most of the players I knew at the time, had been removed for reasons of "political correctness" rather than mechanics or balance, and most of that got put back in 3.0. Of course, I do kinda wish they still called a thief a thief, but I do see the logic in supporting someone who wants that skillset but doesn't want to be thought a criminal. Then again, none of my thieves would admit to being a "thief" when asked. "Locksmith" and "covert entry specialist" are two of my favorites, although said characters still kept slipping coins into their pockets before anybody else noticed the treasure. :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Author : Cab Date : 08-24-07 04:25 AM Thread Title : Re: What did they take out of 0e that they put back into 3.x? I've always thought that 3.x 'felt' more like 0e and than 2e, but I could never really put my finger on it. Can someone help? 3e is formulated to be a miniatures board game as much as it is an RPG; so much of combat relies on exact positioning. In essence, its rather more like chainmail than D&D. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 10] Author : Zaxon D'Mir Date : 08-24-07 09:42 PM Thread Title : Re: What did they take out of 0e that they put back into 3.x? 1st ed characters are left more nebulous... How many languages could Conan Speak? How good at riding a horse was the Grey Mouser? You didn't know the parts that the books didn't cover, and it was left to the player's imagination and the DM's discretion to define what was reasonable given a class/race/level. In 3rd ed, as many attributes as could be conceived of were codified and enumerated. Yep, nothing is more un-heroic than the hero failing his ride skill check and falling from his steed at the most inappropriate time! That's the little tedious mamby-pamby junk that really turns me off to 3e. I seriously hope that 4e is ten times better than this, but I ain't holding my breath! Most of the people I know that play 3e have dumped half the feats, half the combat rules and combined the skills into general catergories (like WOD). It runs a little more like the older editions when this is done. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from Wizards Community (http://forums.gleemax.com) at 05-10-08 08:23 AM.