* * * Wizards Community Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : Making broken rules worse by fixing them. Started at 10-09-07 11:45 PM by keratacon Visit at http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=936716 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : keratacon Date : 10-09-07 11:45 PM Thread Title : Making broken rules worse by fixing them. This is related to a thread I've started and been playing defense on over in the 4th edition rules debate area. It seems like every 3rd edition player -- not every, but a whole lot of them -- are what we would have called in the old days godawful min/maxers. And that the official supplements really encourage this process by loading each one (as opposed to a very small number of "for the players" supplements) with powerful character building goodies. One of your players shows up with a $30 book, you've *got* to give them that level of prestige. Oops, a session or two later they've turned out to be way stronger than you would have guessed, and now your whole group is internet forum powerbuilding their characters. In short the numbers on the character sheets seem to have more authority under the new rules than the DM does. --- note: I play 3.5 and for the most part like it. I was in early highschool when I was seriously playing 2nd. My memories are hazy --- I think the problem is this: Under TSR the rules were basically broken out of the box. Or at least very very confusing. Half the published adventures I saw had made up crap in them that wasn't in any rulebook. As a young DM I figured this was how you played, any chart or rule was a firm suggestion, best followed, but free to be overridden. Playing this way kept my players alive at low levels, and kept them from playing silly tricks with the rules and their equipment and polymorph at high levels. 3rd edition comes along, and the core rules are much much better. It's obvious what saves to use when. It's very clear what monsters to pit against what level PCs and how much magical junk to give them for their efforts. You don't have to cheat to not kill the party. You can go level after level after level without ever deviating from a printed rule. Great. Then one of your players shows up with an official WotC supplement (or, even worse your game goes long and the wizard reaches level 15 or 16 and realizes what they are capable of) and wants to use one of these cool new feats of prestige classes they just dropped $30 on. At this point your position as DM is very different than it was in AD&D. Whereas in AD&D you'd been patching leaky and confusing rules since the very first die roll, here, the books are an authority outside and... above you. But Wizards' supplementary material isn't the carefully balanced and playtested work that the core set is. No it's goofy min/max B.S. that breaks the game in half. And once one character starts playing that way, everyone has to keep up. This is my problem with 3rd. Rules that are good, but break after a while are actually worse than rules that are broken from the start. You have a social contract with your players, and in 3rd that social contract doesn't quite so much involve saying "eh, ignore what it says there" because you never had to ignore a rule to keep single hit die monsters from eradicating them, you can't ignore a rule to prevent them from creating infinite damage loop game breakers. Personally, I play with the core set, and I keep a close eye on the wizard (post 3.5 they're the last true problem class) and we don't use prestige classes. The rules are clean and play fast and I like them. But I'm not playing the way wizards wants me to play. By the time my players are fighting giant dragons, they're supposed to have a stack of supplements and bizarre "builds" instead of characters. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : tankschmidt Date : 10-10-07 08:24 AM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. At this point your position as DM is very different than it was in AD&D. Whereas in AD&D you'd been patching leaky and confusing rules since the very first die roll, here, the books are an authority outside and... above you. Oh man are you right about that. You're preaching to the choir, but you are right about that! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : Varl Date : 10-10-07 11:42 AM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. One of your players shows up with a $30 book, you've *got* to give them that level of prestige. Why? Or they'll walk? What's in this book you've got there? Oh! More prestige classes huh? Big surprise there. So, you want to play the uberknight huh? Okay, not this session, but perhaps the next, okay? I've never read it, so leave it here so I can go over it and decide. So, have you made a decision on that PrC yet? Sure have. There's no way that's ever going to see the light of day in my games. Nice cover art, though. It's as simple as that. If you don't want something in your games, decline it. Who cares how much they spent on it? Their financial and purchasing decisions aren't what dictates what ends up in my game. The end. Oops, a session or two later they've turned out to be way stronger than you would have guessed, and now your whole group is internet forum powerbuilding their characters. See? In short the numbers on the character sheets seem to have more authority under the new rules than the DM does. If this is happening, then the DM is weak and doesn't have a clue what he or she wants in their own game. It's obvious what saves to use when. It's very clear what monsters to pit against what level PCs and how much magical junk to give them for their efforts. You don't have to cheat to not kill the party. Cheat to not kill the party? What? You're speaking in some sympathetic DM tongue, and my phonic detector isn't calibrated towards that frequency. Hold on. *click* Okay, there. Oh I see now. You're talking about keeping characters alive despite any mistakes they make and their best efforts to kill themselves. Well, as any good DM knows, the most fun one can have DMing is when players do stupid things and die horribly. The implication that one has to cheat in order to keep characters alive and prevent that kind of entertainment is just wrong! :rimshot: Then one of your players shows up with an official WotC supplement (or, even worse your game goes long and the wizard reaches level 15 or 16 and realizes what they are capable of) and wants to use one of these cool new feats of prestige classes they just dropped $30 on. It's not your problem, particularly if you don't want it in your game. At this point your position as DM is very different than it was in AD&D. Whereas in AD&D you'd been patching leaky and confusing rules since the very first die roll, here, the books are an authority outside and... above you. The books are an authority? Since when did they take over the farm? You 3e fans should grow a spine and beat down those insolent books that keep rising up with their pitchfork feats and flaming torch PrCs and take back your game! The day the books start running you is the day you've already lost. But Wizards' supplementary material isn't the carefully balanced and playtested work that the core set is. No it's goofy min/max B.S. that breaks the game in half. And once one character starts playing that way, everyone has to keep up. That's called escalation, and I'm not convinced a lot of Wizards material is adequately playtested. Personally, I play with the core set, and I keep a close eye on the wizard (post 3.5 they're the last true problem class) and we don't use prestige classes. The rules are clean and play fast and I like them. But I'm not playing the way wizards wants me to play. The way Wizards wants you to play? Why should Wizards have to tell you which way to play? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : Mojo_Rat Date : 10-10-07 08:32 PM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. I think the first thing you need to do is look at the different sets of rules diferently. 3rd edition is not as a sequal to 2nd or 1st nececarily better. But the others being older ar enot nececarily better Either. What 3rd did was define alot of stuff in the game while at the same time offer players more and more choices the Two things at the same time creates the power imbalance problem because players now have much more defined rules with which do do things and Can define their character mechanically better. (As oposed to just definine them which the old system did just fine) The other thing is At least with the younger players there does not seem to be the ability to look at rules or spells or feats and says 'you know what if i used this or put it all together it woul dbe broken so id better not do it. Ive even seen posts of people geting angry when a Dm delt with some of these situatons. Anyhow best bet to go by Is. When you start a campaign lay out what books are in it. Then Dont allow anything new until the campain is over. OR insist any new book has to be in your hands for two weeks of reading before it can be used. this should solve any real problems and when in dobut just try to apply comon sense. If you read a power and the first thought is 'wow this is totally way too strong' Then encourage people to not use it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : caeruleus Date : 10-12-07 11:21 PM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. This is related to a thread I've started and been playing defense on over in the 4th edition rules debate area. I'd like you to go back to that thread (if you're not still looking at it) and read Carnivorous_Bean's post (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=14063693#post14063693), and my reply following it. I'm wondering if you'd agree with his take on your position (or my take on his take). -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : ApollyonsChosen Date : 03-05-08 11:59 AM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. Gee,god forbid players being able to use some of the options open to them.Let them use whatever they want.Your the DM for god sakes.You aren't clever enough to challenge them anyway?This rant is repeated several times throughout this forum and it gets older every retread i see of it.I could see if it is one player who is trying to rise way above everyone else,but if as a group everyone wants to powergame,you are an ass if you disallow it.Why restrict your players?So many people seem to get off on DM control i find it sickening.It is a game after all. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : tjhairball Date : 03-05-08 12:57 PM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. Gee,god forbid players being able to use some of the options open to them.Let them use whatever they want.Your the DM for god sakes.You aren't clever enough to challenge them anyway?This rant is repeated several times throughout this forum and it gets older every retread i see of it.I could see if it is one player who is trying to rise way above everyone else,but if as a group everyone wants to powergame,you are an ass if you disallow it.Why restrict your players?So many people seem to get off on DM control i find it sickening.It is a game after all. God forbid that a DM try to balance a game, or that the DM choose to try to make the game more fun for the whole group as opposed to a little bit more fun for one or two players in one or two session and a lot less fun for the rest of the group over the course of play. Because that's what it gets down to. "I got this in an official supplement so it must be good" when it disrupts the story, disrupts the atmosphere of play for the campaign, and makes other players feel their character is only marginally heroic in comparison. And the argument gets down to "Oh but you can always rule it out" when the point being made is how much harder it is to do that in 3rd than 2nd, simply because of the way it is built and sold. Everybody knew that most AD&D material wouldn't fit any given game, so you had to be picking and choosing. What 3rd did was define alot of stuff in the game while at the same time offer players more and more choices. Do you even know how many different options were available in AD&D? Or how much genuine ambiguity there has been in each edition? I call bull on that. Get back to me after you've read through a few thousand pages of AD&D optional supplements, and looked at how much more you need to read to figure out what all the different options available in AD&D were. I used to have a compressed plaintext file with a quick stats/summary of every monster in AD&D official materials... it was about a megabyte. Plain *.TXT. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Author : wrenhunter Date : 03-05-08 03:54 PM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. Gee,god forbid players being able to use some of the options open to them.Let them use whatever they want.Your the DM for god sakes.You aren't clever enough to challenge them anyway?This rant is repeated several times throughout this forum and it gets older every retread i see of it.I could see if it is one player who is trying to rise way above everyone else,but if as a group everyone wants to powergame,you are an ass if you disallow it.Why restrict your players?So many people seem to get off on DM control i find it sickening.It is a game after all. This is the difference between 1e and 3e, imo. For someone raised on 1e (like myself), there are TOO MANY choices -- even in the core rules. Throw in the supplements, and it's a wonder anyone ever leaves the inn. And you're right, it is a game. How do games work? You all agree on a set of rules BEFOREHAND, then play by them. How much fun would Monopoly be if someone showed up with Parker Bros' "Trump Towers" expansion kit halfway through? Hint: none, except for the guy in the frosted wig. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Author : RedWizard Date : 03-05-08 05:00 PM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. Gee,god forbid players being able to use some of the options open to them.Let them use whatever they want.Your the DM for god sakes.You aren't clever enough to challenge them anyway?This rant is repeated several times throughout this forum and it gets older every retread i see of it.I could see if it is one player who is trying to rise way above everyone else,but if as a group everyone wants to powergame,you are an ass if you disallow it.Why restrict your players?So many people seem to get off on DM control i find it sickening.It is a game after all. Methinks me hears the voice of a youngster, but this here is the out of print section, not the character optimization thread, so your outnumbered by the old timers I'm afraid.;) Just kidding, I have no idea how old you are, but most of the people I hear argue the merits of "powergaming" do tend to still be in high school. Anyway, as to your (dubious) points, sure if the whole group wants to powergame they have every right to. Just as the DM has every right to close his books and ask who the new DM is going to be. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 10] Author : ApollyonsChosen Date : 03-05-08 08:42 PM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. Well said.God i wish i were as young as i must sound.I suppose that the DM is also trying to run a game that he enjoys "playing" but certainly not at the expense of his actual players,and not to fit his own pre-concieved notions of what fantasy "is" or "is not".There is no fantasy canon so to speak. Having grown up on the original editions,i found some of the limitations on characters extremely limiting.I am sure many of these were ignored like level limits for demi-humans,alignment restrictions and such things.House ruled ,no doubt,by the old school power gamers.But i guess what i am trying to say is that a happy medium should be reached by everyone involved and i would bend some rules if only it meant keeping a core gaming group up and running. For the record i like well made characters,and a certain amount of min/maxing is expected.But i to despise anything that while powerful,is unrealistic even in DnD terms.Anything with conflicting races,multiple templates,and or silly class combinations is frowned on in my corner of the gaming universe.And my group consists of some really bizarre characters,by old school standards.It includes a half vampire Ninjaa Half Ogre barbarian,an Incubusand a Warlock.Nothing too out there.Just unconventional compared to many old schoolers. My first edition collection shares shelf space with my soon to be oop three point five stuff.Would you believe they charged me thirty five bucks for the fiend folio in less than stellar condition?Anyway i just thought i would share my views and i do appreciate the thoughtful response.Thanks guys -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 11] Author : Handsome Stranger Date : 03-05-08 08:44 PM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. This is the difference between 1e and 3e, imo. And you're right, it is a game. How do games work? You all agree on a set of rules BEFOREHAND, then play by them. How much fun would Monopoly be if someone showed up with Parker Bros' "Trump Towers" expansion kit halfway through? Hint: none, except for the guy in the frosted wig. I've been viewing the (tolerable on their own) D20 Fantasy core rules as sort of a Personal Seat License that is really designed purely to let you buy the "Power-Up Of The Month" and destroy game balance $30 at a time. I still think that's a fair description of Wizbro's business model, but I really, really like this description for how actual play falls completely apart under all these Mickey-Mouse expansions which apparently were never playtested individually, let alone together. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 12] Author : ApollyonsChosen Date : 03-05-08 08:48 PM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. And WOTC has NEVER published a supplement as awesome as the original Unearthed Arcana for ADnD.Quantity will never trump quality.Good lord,can anyone name a sourcebook that gave as many new options as that book?I miss the old days to a certain degree. I kind of wonder what DnD would be like if Gary Gygax had not lost control of TSR.Sadly i don't think 4th Ed would be what he had in mind. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 13] Author : nickcan Date : 03-06-08 07:18 AM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. Neither was 3rd -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 14] Author : Handsome Stranger Date : 03-06-08 07:39 AM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. Neither was 3rd Yeah, it's a matter of public record that he was unimpressed with D20 Fantasy. I'm kicking around the idea that "Dangerous Journeys" represents the genuine 3rd edition of Dungeons and Dragons, and that "Lejendary Adventures" represents the real 4th. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 15] Author : Kursk Date : 03-06-08 10:19 AM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. here, the books are an authority outside and... above you. Really? pg. 6 DMG: “That doesn't mean you can tell people what to do outside the boundaries of the game, but it does mean you're the final arbiter of the rules within the game. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 16] Author : havard Date : 03-06-08 10:42 AM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. Gee,god forbid players being able to use some of the options open to them.Let them use whatever they want.Your the DM for god sakes.You aren't clever enough to challenge them anyway?This rant is repeated several times throughout this forum and it gets older every retread i see of it.I could see if it is one player who is trying to rise way above everyone else,but if as a group everyone wants to powergame,you are an ass if you disallow it.Why restrict your players?So many people seem to get off on DM control i find it sickening.It is a game after all. I agree and disagree with you. Heh. I think alot of old timers are depressingly traditional about what D&D should be about. A game where everyone plays a Demon of some kind could be fun! Or Vampires. Or Werewolves. Whoever thought of that? ;) Heck, I used to look to GURPS for those kinds of unconvetional games, but now I don't have to anymore. OTOH, I think DM control is very important. My rule number one is: If it's cool, I'll allow it. Cool as in tasteful. Different is good, as long as it isn't designed to abuse rules or munchkinize your character. Another requirement is that the character should fit in with the rest of the party. Do they have a reason to hang out with you, or at least tolerate you, or would they kill you on sight? Furthermore, does the character fit with the adventures I'm designing. Sure I can make adjustments, but I might not want to rewrite the entire campaign. DM control is also what kept my 3E campaigns to work. I allow certain books and disallow others. To keep things simple for myself, I usually stuck with Players Handbook options only. I'd do something similar if I went back to 2e. I remember how those kits from the Complete X's Handbook series seriously messed with our campaigns back then. Much more so than any PrC ever has. Assuming the same level of DM control, I don't agree that a 3E game is any more susceptible to munckin abuse than AD&D is. Havard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 17] Author : ApollyonsChosen Date : 03-07-08 07:59 PM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. I wonder if the new edition will eventually lose all control of quality the way the current one has.I am told some of the newer material is riddled with errors and contradictions. Just imagine how fine they could have made the first edition had they chose to support it rather than bury it.... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 18] Author : SamualT Barronsword Date : 03-09-08 04:59 PM Thread Title : Re: Making broken rules worse by fixing them. I wonder if the new edition will eventually lose all control of quality the way the current one has.I am told some of the newer material is riddled with errors and contradictions..... Do you think that is unintentional? What better way to force players to accept the "need" to switch to a new edition than by producing older edition sourcebooks full of errors and contradictions. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from Wizards Community (http://forums.gleemax.com) at 05-10-08 08:22 AM.