Community

"As a 3rd edition/3.5 Edition discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving 4th edition  approaches 1." (Goodwin's Law)

I'm sorry if this becomes a rant, but I'm frustrated and need to vent in the open before I go off and derail a thread by chewing out some poor user that doesn't deserve it.

I choose not to play 4th edition D&D. Me and my gaming group are quite happy to continue to play 3.5 D&D, and will continue to do so through the lifespan of 4th edition. This is why I continue to read, and post on, the previous editions boards.

It seriously irks me to no end when I read a post about how "4th edition fixes that problem", or "this is why they changed that in 4th edition", or "it's so much easier and simpler in 4th edition". You know what? I don't care.

I'm not here to read about how 4th edition handles a particular problem, I'm here to figure out how to resolve issues in 3.5 edition. 4th edition "fixed" problems by throwing them out the door like a redheaded stepchild. Spells that don't deal damage are overpowered? *fling* What spells that don't deal damage? The Diplomacy skill is overpowered? *fling* What Diplomacy skill?

Sure, that may be a "fix" if you're willing to change gaming systems, but if that's the case I could have "fixed" the problem by switching to the White Wolf system, or Shadowrun, or Palladium Fantasy... There is zero class balance issues in Monopoly. Nobody complains that the race car is overpowered, or that the Get Out of Jail Free card is broken. Maybe I should just play that game instead of 3.5 D&D. It "fixes" all the problems!

I don't need, (or want) to use a second system to address the issues in this system. I keep seeing 4th edition bleeding into the posts here on the older edition boards, and I can't figure out why. Sure, there are people who play in multiple games, and use multiple editions and multiple editions. That's awesome! What's that got to do with addressing 3rd/3.5 edition problems within the context of those editions?

If you've got a house rule to suggest, based on how 4th edition handles the situation, then I'm willing to admit that it may be valid. Posting just to say that "4th edition did away with that, and we don't miss it one bit" is on the verge of condescending, and really isn't all that helpful.

At no point did anyone post a "4th edition fix" in reply to any of my posts.

Everything in the above post is 100% my own personal opinion, and I make no claims to assume I know what is or is not helpful to the rest of the members of this or any message board.

I have no doubt that people will be either completely ignoring my rant, calling me a grognard or otherwise telling me to "STFU".

I did not wake up on the wrong side of the bed, do not have my panties in a bunch, and nobody peed in my corn flakes.

I don't play 4E either, but I kept note of how they solved a lot of the problems with 3.5.  Looking ahead to what they did is good practice for how to institute a house rule, as is looking back to 1 and 2E to see what they did.

==Aelryinth

Sep 21, 2009 -- 8:07PM, aelryinth wrote:

I don't play 4E either, but I kept note of how they solved a lot of the problems with 3.5.  Looking ahead to what they did is good practice for how to institute a house rule, as is looking back to 1 and 2E to see what they did.

==Aelryinth

Taking ideas from other editions, or even other games entirely, isn't so much the issue I have as it is seeing posts that  imply, or outright state,  that the corrective action is 4th edition.

Sep 21, 2009 -- 10:38PM, jgumbyrx wrote:

Amen, Brother Airos.

In the same vein, I have some issues with a few that have been at my table that whine over how things changed from previous editions.  "DAG-NABBIT GUY; WE'RE NOT PLAYING 1ST.ED. OR ROLEMASTER"; or "I DON'T CARE ABOUT 3.0; I HAPPEN TO LIKE MANY OF THE CHANGES IN 3.5.  IF YOU WANT TO PLAY USING OLDER RULES, THEN GO FIND SOMEONE ELSES GAME".

so, what specific issues are you looking to have addressed?
once a thread devolves in to an edition war, I usually ignore it.

No particular issue, really. What sparked this whole rant was in the Craft thread, which quickly moved from the skill to several other issues, at some point made mention how a wizard with the Fabricate spell can easily disrupt the world economy. The reply was roughly "that's why they took spells like that out of 4th".

Okay, and what's that got to do with anything? I'm still playing 3.5, so it doesn't help me any  to say that any more than it helps me as a vegetarian to tell me that McDonald's in India has vegan friendly foods on their menu. Sure, if I ever happen to be in India and hungry, it's nice to know that the option is there, and if I ever find myself frustrated about powerful spells and playing 4th edition, I can take solace in the fact that they have been removed. Until then, I'd like options that deal with the problems within 3.5.

I know what you mean. A little over a year ago, I had a serious problem player in my group. It was actually the second time he was in my group, but I was convinced to give him a second chance after he flaked out on us the first time.

First, a long winded back story about me and my gaming style.

I cut my teeth on red box basic. Sure, it was 1992, but my dad had bought it for some unknown reason back in the 80's and it sat on the shelf until I was old enough to understand it. Back then I learned fly-by-the-seat-of-my-pants DMing. There were all of 10 rules at best, and adventuring equipment amounted to; pointy stick, not-pointy stick, armor, food, empty bag and fire. You stuck your head in a hole, stabbed something and took its money. If a PC wanted to do *anything* aside from attack with either of the two sticks or cast one of the like 7 spells, you had to just make it up as DM and the PCs *had* to be cool with it.

Around '94ish I started picking up any 1st edition AD&D books I could find at thrift stores for a buck or two. Then buying extra copies and selling them to my friends for $5. More rules, but I still had to make up most things, such as social interaction, making your own stuff from scratch, (including magic items), epic rules, fancy combat maneuvers, and all that. If the PCs wanted to do something outside the rules, they looked to the DM and aided by the answer. Splash in 2nd edition around '95-'96, and we used a kinda hybrid of the two since the systems were fairly compatible.

Year 2k and 3rd edition comes out, and there was much rejoicing. There were actual *rules* for all the stuff we needed to play by ear for so many years. Huzzah! We continued to make stuff up for fun.

So, now we get to "problem player". We'll call him "Pat". Because his name is Patrick.

He's never actually "played" D&D before, so much as "bought some 3rd edition books for cheap after we all bought 3.5". Convinced himself that he's memorized the books, that he's "awesome" at magic item design and has "broken" character builds.

Well, his designs more or less sucked. His characters were ineffective, his magic items weren't actually balanced in any way, (epic weapons with only a +1 enhancement bonus), and fought me just about every step of the way when I made any effort to correct him or help him.

He got it in his head that because it was "in the books" that it was his "right" to use them. He actually had the stones to tell me that the magic item creation guidelines in the DMG were "how you made new magic items", (forgetting the "guidelines" part), and "were meant for PCs with item creation feats". I had to explain to him what *Dungeon Masters Guide* meant, and that it wasn't "Player's Handbook".

What it boiled down to, in my and the rest of the group's opinion, was information overload. With so many actual *rules* regarding what a character can do it becomes difficult, if not impossible, for a DM to say "no" or "wait a minute" without looking like a jerk. If it's a rule in printing, then it's "fair game". "DM fiat" and "Rule 0" are more or less gone in favor of a more streamlined gaming experience.

One the one hand, it's nice to have some consistency from game to game without having to remember how you ruled a PC making a running jump into a hoard of goblins and swinging his sword around wildly, because lord knows the players will remember if you don't rule exactly the same way a second time. On the other, players get hung up on the idea that rules a just that, rules; that they're the holy gospel of the game and they're not up for debate. If it says in a book they can do it, then they'll do it come hell or high water, DM be damned.

And as far as my comments in the craft thread, I simply felt that a voice of reason needed to step in and offer up a more grounded point of view. Since nobody that fit the bill was actually posting in there, I decided to be disagreeable and throw about hyperbole.

When all is said and done, though, my opinion always remains "if your group is having fun, then you're doin' it right". It doesn't matter how many weird house rules, or bad misinterpretations of rules you're using, as long as it's "cool". If people are smiling, and continue to come back for each game you run, then there is nothing wrong with your style.

Sep 22, 2009 -- 4:05AM, Airos wrote:

Also, I just wanted to add in something else that I wanted to bring up, but got lost on my little tangent there.

During one of the many, many discussions I was involved in about 3rd vs. 4th, (I think it was over on the Nifty Message Boards), an awesome point was brought up; Whatever version of "D&D" you buy off the shelf is only a snapshot of the designers current D&D.

As the game is being built, eventually it gets stable enough to release to the public. At that point it becomes whatever edition; 1st, 4th, 297th, whatever. Now, and here's the kicker; the designers keep designing. They continue to tinker with the game, and it evolves. They're not playing "4th edition", they using some horribly patched and house ruled franken-D&D right now. When it looks like it actually works, they release it as a book, and continue screw around some more.

So why shouldn't we do the same? Why stick to what is the printed word? Tinker with the rules, keep what works, ditch what doesn't. Find your own version of "D&D" and call it your own.

And with that point, I sleep now.

and yet another link that will be emailed to my players.

it sounds as though our indoctrination to DMing are fairly similar.

I'd like to propose an addition to your corollary: "... and the same is true with regards to a 4e discussion and invocation of 3.x."