Do you like the 3-rd Edition rules

[Morgeruat]

ahh well different strokes for diferent folks, I'll continue liking my second edition books, all $5000+ of it

[uss]

Originally posted by Aelia Jusa: quote: Originally posted by Morgeruat: third edition then came along and ruined the whole thing, they completely screwed up alot of things that us longtime 1st and 2nd editioners held as sacred, the Armor Class system for instance

I actually like the change that a positive AC is better. Makes much more sense, it was done that way in Wizardry 8, and once I figured out what was going on I liked it much more than negative being better.

I also like the point buy system for abilities. I like that your character is kind of weak to start with but gets stronger with experience. Makes sense. It also stops me from making characters with 18 in every important stat and like 6 in ones I don't care about lol . Also I like that you have to have 9 intelligence to speak properly. Is much more realistic than some of the intelligence 3 characters I had running around in BG saving the world completely lucidly [/QUOTE]Now, those are the things i like. I don`t like that every class levels up at the same time. i also don`t like that AC and THACO are changed. The removal of class/race restrictions may be a bit wierd sometimes but personally, i like it.

[Sneeki Two]

I started playing 1rst, then 2nd. I think 3rd has too many options now. The game is a bit bloated now. I liked 2nd the most. It improved on 1rst while still keeping the basic format.

The fewer dice I have to roll the better. Back during 1rst ed. if a character had to perform a feat that required some special skill, I simply had the charater roll against the stat that had the most success of effecting the outcome with pluses or minuses as I saw fit. On simple feats, I didnt even bother to roll. It kept the game flowing. For some people, what I did may be heresy, but for my friends and I it was fine.

Someone also mentioned that they hated that elves and other longed lived races couldn't dual class but could only multiclass(which was very slow). The reason is that elves are hard wired to do things the elven way, just like dwarves are forced to do things in their stubborn way. They take their time with everything and constantly strive to keep outside influences from their societies, usually. Do you think a master dwarven smith would take advice from a master human smith of equal skill. Probably not(even it sped up the dwarfs process).

Humans, on the other hand, work on a more limited time frame and therefore progress much more quickly (why dwarves and elves think they are so reckless, dangerous even). Humans tend to be more free thinking and willing to try new things, while the longer lived races are far more conservative (too conservative in many instances, which is why they had level restrictions).

It is also why the long-lived races don't dominate the world. They live for hundreds of years but reproduce very slowly, and are very resistant to change. Those are the reasons why they were so limited in 1rst and 2nd edition rules. It actually made humans a lot more desireable to me. The older races had all the advantages otherwise.

3rd edition is okay, but I still prefer 2nd for personal play reasons. For NWN its okay (Because the computer does most of the work, hehe).

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Sneeki Two: The fewer dice I have to roll the better. Back during 1rst ed. if a character had to perform a feat that required some special skill, I simply had the charater roll against the stat that had the most success of effecting the outcome with pluses or minuses as I saw fit. On simple feats, I didnt even bother to roll. It kept the game flowing. For some people, what I did may be heresy, but for my friends and I it was fine..

You captured the essense of the game. [img]smile.gif[/img] Far from being heresy.

[Morgeruat]

I agree, having to roll for everything, from a spot check for every NPC to see if a thief did actually hide successfully, to everything having an opposed roll(nearly anyway) it really slows down the game, the point was illustrated quite well in a Knights of the dinner table where the characters had to roll something like 700 dice of various types in order to determine iniative(an attack roll was about twice the number, and then their opponent got a dodge attempt for each attack). Rolling too many dice and trying to describe what that number means to everyone in the game (in conversation terms you don't speak in character about rolling a 20, or your charisma score being an 18), having to roll everything twice just bogs down gameplay way too much to be useful to me.