3rd Edition rules a turn off?

[CTHULHU007]

Madriver, "Instead of just complaining that 3ED isn't very good, state your reasons why, maybe you will point something out that I haven't thought of before and I'll be grateful for it."

Ok some reasons. The way they unbalanced races by removing class resrtictions. There is no longer any attraction to being human, Elven,Dwarven,Gnomish, Half-Orc,...etc.Why would you want to be Human when you could be Elvish or a Dwarf with not class restrictions no penalties. Hey everybodys equal here...bah idiotic. The level limitations to races is one thing I overlooked when DM'ing, but NOT the class restrictions. Class restrictions were apart of the game balance.
Let's see... The way they took away Thaco. Just what was wrong with Thaco? Thaco was a good system and if anyone says different they weren't using it correctly.
The way they added Diablo-like skills. Each class in the old editions had it's strong points. That's why you chose to be a certain class you wanted to be good at a certain thing. There was no need for feats/skills. Each class was distinctive. It was a group deal you had to have a variety of classes to get by. "I want a superman Diablo clone character with WW attack..smite..assasination..etc etc etc." WOTC, "No problem sonny here you go."
The way they limited level to 20th(oh I forgot there is an expansion for higher levels...hmm how much will that cost you 3rd ED lovers? heh).
The way they changed the A.C. Here again a derivitive of Diablo. Big numbers make Mongo happy lol.
These reasons I note are all what makes you like 3rd ED. It's a different mindset I suppose. Perhaps you never grasped the old game good. Those that did loved it and still love it.

I could go on but I am tired after already making a long post. Maybe I'll post some more points later ..if I thought it would do any good. :>

I'll not fall for the WOTC horror which is not Dungeons & Dragons. Never!

[Madriver]

Originally posted by CTHULHU007: 3rd ED is a play on Diablo..the COMPUTER game not Dungeons & Dragons. I see why some like it now...it's that similiarity with the simplistic Diablo. Probably EXACTLY what WOTC had in mind. WOTC can burn. Listen to what has been said...skill points...depends on what skills and feats you invest in as to how powerfull you'll be or what area you specialize in ...hmmm Diablo 2? lol BAAAAHHHH. Yes I have looked over the ruleset to 3rd ED. So please do not attempt to claim I am ignorant or I do not know where I speak from. Do not say "Try it first." either. I HAVE tried it. Why do you think I dislike it so? This is not D&D and NEVER WILL BE to me. Maybe to the younger generation perhaps or people that actually favor the destruction of a great game due to more importance placed on ROLEplay and not ROLLplay. Those that have played Basic, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, or even AD&D 2nd Edition should know better. Like I said before ...does one rewrite the rules of Chess? Checkers? Monopoly even...lol. NO. People wouldn't favor a rules change because they like them the way they are, because they are good the way they are. Same goes for Dungeons & Dragons. I wouldn't have a problem in the world with 3rd Edition if it was done as TSR did with the Basic and Advanced sets. If you wanted to play Basic D&D you still could..it wasn't destroyed..if you wanted to play Advanced as well that was fine. You could still purchase material for both sets. One didn't take the place of the other as 2nd Edition and most unfortunately 3rd ED did. The different between those two is 2nd ED held to the old ruleset for of the old game for the most part with the some class changes, the addition of class sets..etc. and could very easily be converted if required. 3rd ED warps the ruleset around so much it no longer even resembles D&D anymore. They rewrote Chess into Checkers and are selling it to those of the dim veiw to buy it, but all us Chess players are mad as hell that we are stuck with Checkers now. That's a perfect analogy to 3rd ED and 1st-2nd. Please don't give me "Play 2nd ED if you want." or "You can convert this or that." . I can still play PnP 1st or 2nd ED aye, but those games are dead now...replaced by this Diablo clone. There will be no more ADDITIONS to 1st or 2nd ED rulesets. No kits, no new manuals, nothing. Conversion is empty. The player base is destroyed for 1st and 2nd ED...as well as the DM base. Many if not most will probably give in and convert to 3rd ED. I can't very well play under a 3rd ED DM with my 1st or 2nd ED characters can I? and I damn sure will not convert any of my old friends(characters) into 3rd ED trash. When I DM and the players bring their 3rd ED characters to my 1st ED adventure shall I endure the horror of converting this garbage into 1st ED? I think not. What shall I do with the (Diablo) skills? They would have to be stripped bare ..something I don't think they would like with their Diablo clone characters. I hope my words enlighten some to not buy into the B.S. If not oh well I tried. Did I mention I don't much like 3rd ED? [img]smile.gif[/img]

You like to bash 3ED a lot and you say you have played it and know what you're talking about but have yet to actually critique anything from 3ED. BTW...comparing any PNP game to Diablo shows that you seem to be bashing without reason.
And yes, there have been improvements on chess...most of the turn based strategy games out nowadays have their basis in chess, the ultimate turn-based strategy game.
I like all of the feats and skills (what I'm assuming you're using to compare with Diablo) because it means that I can create whatever character I like and don't need a premade "kit".
Let me know what you don't like about 3ED, not just general statements about "will never live up to previous 1st and 2nd versions". I'm interested why an obvious old-time gamer like yourself is so turn-offed by the game...because I'm an old-timed gamer myself and I like it.

[CTHULHU007]

It's simple. I do not like such drastic changes in a game I grew to love over the years. I didn't care much for 2nd ED either when they stole the company from Gygax and forced it down out throats. I became moderately acceptant to 2nd ED over time...but I do not ever see that happening with 3rd ED. It's just totally gone. It's destroyed for me now plain and simple. Complaining about it cannot help much I suppose. Would you not complain if they drastically refined the rules of Football to make it more like Soccer? Assuming your a football fan you'd probably be pretty damn mad. It's simple logic as to why I am annoyed.
On arguing with my analogy..to point out..the basic rules of chess have been the same for MANY MANY years. To say they may have based many TBS's on chess is fine. Those would be NEW games not replacements.
You may look above your post to see a few real reasons why I dislike 3rd ED. Besides the fact that 3rd ED is here for no other reason than to sell the maximum material for WOTC.

[Madriver]

Originally posted by CTHULHU007: It's simple. I do not like such drastic changes in a game I grew to love over the years. I didn't care much for 2nd ED either when they stole the company from Gygax and forced it down out throats. I became moderately acceptant to 2nd ED over time...but I do not ever see that happening with 3rd ED. It's just totally gone. It's destroyed for me now plain and simple. Complaining about it cannot help much I suppose. Would you not complain if they drastically refined the rules of Football to make it more like Soccer? Assuming your a football fan you'd probably be pretty damn mad. It's simple logic as to why I am annoyed. On arguing with my analogy..to point out..the basic rules of chess have been the same for MANY MANY years. To say they may have based many TBS's on chess is fine. Those would be NEW games not replacements. You may look above your post to see a few real reasons why I dislike 3rd ED. Besides the fact that 3rd ED is here for no other reason than to sell the maximum material for WOTC.

I agree with you that 3ED does give WOTC a lot more money than just refining AD&D would...but I think that many of the changes to the system are long overdue. A classic example is the THACO and the saving throw rules, 3ED simplifies it to the point it should be.

I disagree with you in terms of ruining the game though...the game is still there, just the mechanics have been refined. Instead of increasing predefined skills per level the player gets to choose what skills to improve, based on class restrictions. So the fighter can't get magical skills...but he can get a multitude of combat skills to differentiate him from other characters.

Tell me what you don't like about 3ED, I'm very interested now. I'm curious how a fighter in 1st edition D&D who can only improve weapon skills on an increase in levels is superior to 3ED rules where they can choose between weapon skills or various feats...as if he had trained with a specific teacher and learned a specific skill.

3ED allows for more customized characters, which eventually pleases more people. I think the biggest change in 3ED is the players handbook...the DM's guide is very similar to the rest of the editions, just the chapters are superficially altered to account for a new purchase.

Even though some of the books are obviously made for profit, I think most of the changes are for the better.

Let me know what you don't like...I'm interested.

[Madriver]

Cthulu....I can tell you are an old time player...your name seems to be from a very limited version of the deities and demi-gods AD&D book, the one with Elric. I have both versions of the book.

[Madriver]

Originally posted by CTHULHU007: Madriver, "Instead of just complaining that 3ED isn't very good, state your reasons why, maybe you will point something out that I haven't thought of before and I'll be grateful for it." Ok some reasons. The way they unbalanced races by removing class resrtictions. There is no longer any attraction to being human, Elven,Dwarven,Gnomish, Half-Orc,...etc.Why would you want to be Human when you could be Elvish or a Dwarf with not class restrictions no penalties. Hey everybodys equal here...bah idiotic. The level limitations to races is one thing I overlooked when DM'ing, but NOT the class restrictions. Class restrictions were apart of the game balance. Let's see... The way they took away Thaco. Just what was wrong with Thaco? Thaco was a good system and if anyone says different they weren't using it correctly. The way they added Diablo-like skills. Each class in the old editions had it's strong points. That's why you chose to be a certain class you wanted to be good at a certain thing. There was no need for feats/skills. Each class was distinctive. It was a group deal you had to have a variety of classes to get by. "I want a superman Diablo clone character with WW attack..smite..assasination..etc etc etc." WOTC, "No problem sonny here you go." The way they limited level to 20th(oh I forgot there is an expansion for higher levels...hmm how much will that cost you 3rd ED lovers? heh). The way they changed the A.C. Here again a derivitive of Diablo. Big numbers make Mongo happy lol. These reasons I note are all what makes you like 3rd ED. It's a different mindset I suppose. Perhaps you never grasped the old game good. Those that did loved it and still love it. I could go on but I am tired after already making a long post. Maybe I'll post some more points later ..if I thought it would do any good. :> I'll not fall for the WOTC horror which is not Dungeons & Dragons. Never!

Sorry...it looks like we posted at the same time...I'm looking at your reasons right now.

Actually...if you created a character in the new rules you would realize the benefits of each race and the restrictions. Each race gets some kind of ability or magical benefit, but they also get a disadvantage. The new rules actually give a player an advantage if they want to play human...because they get an extra feat and extra skills during character creation. So you have to weigh the advantages of the non-human races against the advantages of playing human.

I also like the ability score increases every 4 levels, seems very practical since you're using your skills so often.

As for THACO...it was a good system but didn't have to be so complicated. Why did you have to roll high to hit but yet your armor class decreased with better equipment...seemed counter-intuitive. Basically they actually related your armor class to your to-hit score in a way that doesn't need a table, not a problem to me.

The classes still have their strong points, an example is that a paladin is the only class with lay-on-hands, but in the end they are still fighters and still get fighter skills. Each class has advantages and disadvantages...it is up to the player to choose what they want. To me that is the ultimate RPG, the player has the choice where to go.

To each his (or her) own.

[WOLFGIR]

Originally posted by CTHULHU007: It's simple. I do not like such drastic changes in a game I grew to love over the years. I didn't care much for 2nd ED either when they stole the company from Gygax and forced it down out throats. I became moderately acceptant to 2nd ED over time...but I do not ever see that happening with 3rd ED. It's just totally gone. It's destroyed for me now plain and simple. Complaining about it cannot help much I suppose. Would you not complain if they drastically refined the rules of Football to make it more like Soccer? Assuming your a football fan you'd probably be pretty damn mad. It's simple logic as to why I am annoyed. On arguing with my analogy..to point out..the basic rules of chess have been the same for MANY MANY years. To say they may have based many TBS's on chess is fine. Those would be NEW games not replacements. You may look above your post to see a few real reasons why I dislike 3rd ED. Besides the fact that 3rd ED is here for no other reason than to sell the maximum material for WOTC.

So tell me then one thing. What does CHess, Soccer football and the constitution of US have to do with Roleplaying? Rules are rules and they have changed progressivly since people wants change in most games. Computers change or would you still like an ABC 80? I have a friend that have one he doesn´t use it. And change is a good thing, but not for you it seems, but for many others.
Sure you see it as a Diablo clone, ROLLplaying as you say, but quite frankly it is not we who like it who has a problem and can roleplay it. We can we like it it. So don´t go calling 3:ed players mongrels when you can´t coup with the change. Tell me what is the difference truelly between an AC of -12 and a AC of 22?? Is it roleplaying or rollplaying?

And by the way I didn´t mean the Basic as basic D&D games, but the system that had percent in skills and to attack and block attacks. (just a clarification)

"3rd ED is a play on Diablo..the COMPUTER game not Dungeons & Dragons. I see why some like it now...it's that similiarity with the simplistic Diablo."
When you can show morte examples of this simplistic play and then tell us how great first editions multifacetted suystem was sure..

"Why do you think I dislike it so? This is not D&D and NEVER WILL BE to me. Maybe to the younger generation perhaps or people that actually favor the destruction of a great game due to more importance placed on ROLEplay and not ROLLplay."
It´s your problem mate, YOU can´t roleplay it cause you read ROLLplay into the complete system. It might not be your basic or your Dungeons and Dragons and for that I´m sorry, and further sorry that you can´t roleplay and make due with the old ruleset and play on. But why? No new modules? I thought you were into Roleplaying? Do you really need more modules for that? Why not continue making adventures and characterr the way you liked to play?? If you play in a group of players and you are the DM you play 1:st edition right or has your group converted to 3:ed?

And by the way, I get a hunch you haven´t read the rules and played it that much since you seem to have lost the advantages of playing a human in 3:ed. And your comparison to Diablo skills?? Where the heck can a Diablo character learn diplomacy in that game? Read lips?? Class restrictions isn´t there anymore but as said before. The DM makes more than 75% of the game being played. Thats roleplaying, you set rules, you change what you don´t like. Thats roleplaying my friend.
And Thac0 leads to the same thing as the 3:ed system, did you hit or not?

"These reasons I note are all what makes you like 3rd ED. It's a different mindset I suppose. Perhaps you never grasped the old game good. Those that did loved it and still love it."

Speak for yourself, I had many good games in the old systems and I did grasp the rules very well. Some people however like the change for something that we feel is for the better.

The new games makes it easier to customize it since you can take things you don´t like and drop on the floor and easy add your own flavor to the game. You don´t like feats, drop them. You don´t like sneak attacks, remove it. You can remove the level system as well. The question is what to remove and what to add, but it´s up to you. I´m sorry but I don´t buy your critique, the suggestions you have made is either IMHO that you have not grapsed the new rules as you claim the youngsters here to not have with the old systems or there are not nearly enough restrictions for you.

You are bashing away pretty heavy, but you are vague in your arguments, and you don´t need to clarify if you don´t. You don´t like 3:ed.. By the way did I tell you I like 3:ed better than 2:nd edition?

[CTHULHU007]

"So tell me then one thing. What does CHess, Soccer football and the constitution of US have to do with Roleplaying? Rules are rules and they have changed progressivly since people wants change in most games. Computers change or would you still like an ABC 80? I have a friend that have one he doesn´t use it. And change is a good thing, but not for you it seems, but for many others.
Sure you see it as a Diablo clone, ROLLplaying as you say, but quite frankly it is not we who like it who has a problem and can roleplay it. We can we like it it. So don´t go calling 3:ed players mongrels when you can´t coup with the change. Tell me what is the difference truelly between an AC of -12 and a AC of 22?? Is it roleplaying or rollplaying?"

It was not my intent to suggest they had something in common. It was my attempt to show you that some things are best left unchanged. Change is NOT always good. You sound like some political canidate spouting that change is good crap [img]smile.gif[/img] . If somethings good you don't change it. If it's not broke why fix it? Oh I forgot...to sell more copies. Never heard of an ABC 20. Although I still have a Commodore 64 which was a great system for it's time...and yes I still play some of those great old games on an emulator from time to time lol. The difference between A.C. -12 and A.C. 22? The difference there is big numbers make Mongo happy sell Mongo more copies not a question of Roleplayer or Rollplayer.

"It´s your problem mate, YOU can´t roleplay it cause you read ROLLplay into the complete system. It might not be your basic or your Dungeons and Dragons and for that I´m sorry, and further sorry that you can´t roleplay and make due with the old ruleset and play on. But why? No new modules? I thought you were into Roleplaying? Do you really need more modules for that? Why not continue making adventures and characterr the way you liked to play?? If you play in a group of players and you are the DM you play 1:st edition right or has your group converted to 3:ed?"

It seems you misunderstand me. The Roleplayer/Rollplayer analogy I used was in referring to those that place the most importance on the (acting out) part of the game and don't give a damn what ruleset they use. Those I would call ROLEplayers. They don't give a damn about the ROLLplay within the game just the (acting). I did not say that roleplay was not apart of my gaming. It has always been apart of the Dungeons & Dragons. BTW you totally missed my point about continuing to play 1st ED. I full well plan on continuing to play the old game with my local group of older players...but as I said THE PLAYER BASE IS GONE or at least GREATLY diminished. There will NOT be many new players that wish to play the old game. Comprehend?
I do make (homemade)adventures and always have. However I did like getting new material occasionally.
No my old group has not converted to 3rd ED. I'm happy to say they ALL hate it just as much as me and with no prodding from me. One of them was unfortunate enough to purchase some of the material which is where I got my viewing of the rules.

"And by the way, I get a hunch you haven´t read the rules and played it that much since you seem to have lost the advantages of playing a human in 3:ed. And your comparison to Diablo skills?? Where the heck can a Diablo character learn diplomacy in that game? Read lips?? Class restrictions isn´t there anymore but as said before. The DM makes more than 75% of the game being played. Thats roleplaying, you set rules, you change what you don´t like. Thats roleplaying my friend.
And Thac0 leads to the same thing as the 3:ed system, did you hit or not?"

Your absolutely right about me not playing it that much. Why would I play something over and over that I dispise? I have read over the rules however as stated above. It was an instant dislike. My comparison to Diablo is completly valid and most probably a true occurence that WOTC designed it to be so. The addition of a few more skills does not change the comparison. Some of the skill names even have the exact same names as those in Diablo 2 lol. I agree that a good DM is a definite requirement for a good game. The DM does NOT change the set core rules of the game though. He does not because the rules are there for a reason. For game balance. Following the rules of the game and using them to their max potential combined with ROLEplay to make an enjoyable game for all. THAT'S a roleplaying game.

"Speak for yourself, I had many good games in the old systems and I did grasp the rules very well. Some people however like the change for something that we feel is for the better.

The new games makes it easier to customize it since you can take things you don´t like and drop on the floor and easy add your own flavor to the game. You don´t like feats, drop them. You don´t like sneak attacks, remove it. You can remove the level system as well. The question is what to remove and what to add, but it´s up to you. I´m sorry but I don´t buy your critique, the suggestions you have made is either IMHO that you have not grapsed the new rules as you claim the youngsters here to not have with the old systems or there are not nearly enough restrictions for you.

You are bashing away pretty heavy, but you are vague in your arguments, and you don´t need to clarify if you don´t. You don´t like 3:ed.. By the way did I tell you I like 3:ed better than 2:nd edition?"

I don't mind change ...when it's for the good, but as I already said change is NOT always for the better in the real world. The new game... you said it. That's the core. WHY FIX IT WHEN IT'S NOT BROKE? You want a NEW game make a NEW game don't replace/rewrite an old one with it.
Hmm if I hadn't grasped the rules I wouldn't dislike 3rd ED so. Aye you are right there aren't enough restrictions, but that's not the core of my argument which should be apparent.
BTW I never called anyone a Mongrel lol. I merely think that those that actually prefer 3rd ED are...misguided.

Did you know there is a D&D conversion Mod for Diablo 2? I'm sure it was an easy one to make lol.

[ 04-28-2002, 07:39 PM: Message edited by: CTHULHU007 ]

[CTHULHU007]

Let me give you a little conversation that took place on another message board on another website.

"VinceLethal,

One thing I don't like is how WoTC turned D&D into Diablo. What I mean is that in Diablo, the fighters can learn spells and the magic users can wear armor and use any weapon. So do rogues. Whats the point of having different classes besides looking different? And with racial restrictions gone and everyone multi-classing characters have become even more bland. Gone is party balance, every character can eventually go it alone. You won't need to play with a group of friends anymore. This is a game of Xena's and X-men. Not heroes.
Again and again I'm awed by the balance Mr. Gygax built into 1st ed. For every benefit a character had there was a disadvantage. The people who say some classes were too powerful make their ignorance obvious. One only has to READ THE DAMN BOOK and look at the experience point advancement tables. Those classes pay for their power, they earn it. They get the special abilities at the price of slow advancement.
What really infuriates me about 3e is that there was no reason for it other than for the new owners to wring some money out of the game by selling YET ANOTHER set of rulebooks. Do I exaggerate? No. This greed becomes even more pronounced when you look at the Ravens Bluff game. WoTC decided to convert it from 2e to 3e. So players were expected to cough up money to buy 3e players handbooks, as the RPGA would no longer support 2e in any form. As if that wasn't bad enough, WoTC decides to license (rent/lease/prostitute) the Ravens Bluff setting to a group called Organised Play. OP now says in order to play any character with more than one level, you have to ante up and pay them a fee.
In the good old days people used to have Real class. They respected the players enough to put out new ideas in a form compatible with the existing game, like Unearthed Arcana. But its been a long time since original material was between the new covers they put out."

In reply...
"Gary
"One thing I don't like is how WoTC turned D&D into Diablo."

Succinctly put!

The new D&D game is different in more than one way from AD&D. The latter were team games where group play was the objective. 3E focuses on the individual PC, how powerful one can become my multi-classing and all.

Definately a combat-oriented H&S game to promote player advancement over group play and roleplay too.

Such is life.

Now go pick up a copy of the LA game and enjoy the difference (^_^)

Cheerio,
Gary "

The first poster VinceLethal is a member of my gaming group as well as a DM. I'll give you 3 guesses who "Gary" is and the first 2 don't count. That's the father of D&D himself speaking GARY GYGAX...he should know where he is speaking from don't you think? Yes?.
If you question the validity of this post head on over to www.gygax.com and check out the geust book under RPG-Discussion.

[WOLFGIR]

Well I did like Gary Gygax stuff alot I have to say but if he doesn´t like 3:ed well thats up to him. Diablo or no Diablo, I still think that you are mishuided in this.

However, I am not going to try to tell a stone he is stone. You are set in your ways, as I am in mie and we will not get any further by debating here.

The Diablo tendencies in 3:ed is mostly from some of the classbooks, which I don´t like. I have a problem with level system mostly, but 3:Ed makes it a generlly good game.

If you don´t like it you don´t. You thought the old system was good, hence you don´t like the change, I dodn´t like the ol system hence I like the change, and still, 3:ed requires a good multifacetted party for gameplay, or maybe it´s just how the adventures is designed, cause nmo multiclassed character is that powerful.

Well, hope there is a demo for NWN you can try to see if you like that game or not, otherwise you can still loook forward to Morrowind..