|
2 years ago ::
Dec 29, 2010 - 11:06AM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
The thing that amazes me most about going from say 1e and 1.5e(thats what 2e would be called today), aside from so many rules for every little thing is this so called balance. Class balance didn't exist and really no one cared. You're a magic user, this means you die left and right at low levels but people fear you like nothing else IF you get to be high lvl. IF...
People did care and many walked away (like me) and others made there own games. I thought it was very much a crock to not feel magical and feel like some crappy fragile apprentice at low levels. And as a fighter I thought it was a crock to be somebody elses bagage carrier at high levels. Having nothing effective to do for large periods of time (often many many adventures worth advancement was slow as a dog and then level drain could make your mage worthless all over again) is un fun and all the romanticizing in the world shrug... its nostalgia... longing for the bad old days.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 29, 2010 - 11:20AM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
The thing that amazes me most about going from say 1e and 1.5e(thats what 2e would be called today), aside from so many rules for every little thing is this so called balance. Class balance didn't exist and really no one cared. You're a magic user, this means you die left and right at low levels but people fear you like nothing else IF you get to be high lvl. IF...
People did care and many walked away (like me) and others made there own games. I thought it was very much a crock to not feel magical and feel like some crappy fragile apprentice at low levels. And as a fighter I thought it was a crock to be somebody elses bagage carrier at high levels. Having nothing effective to do for large periods of time (often many many adventures worth advancement was slow as a dog and then level drain could make your mage worthless all over again) is un fun and all the romanticizing in the world shrug... its nostalgia... longing for the bad old days.
+1
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 29, 2010 - 11:23AM
#33
|
|
|
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 29, 2010 - 11:43AM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Nov 16, 2010
|
RP has nothing to do with the edition. If you can RP, then you can do it 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6E..... it won't matter. Though to be fair, my first 4E character was an unaligned charisma paladin who cared more about his hair than helping people  One of those "Just because I never could before" things.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 29, 2010 - 11:48AM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Jul 14, 2008
|
RP has nothing to do with the edition. If you can RP, then you can do it 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6E..... it won't matter. Though to be fair, my first 4E character was an unaligned charisma paladin who cared more about his hair than helping people One of those "Just because I never could before" things.
Why couldn't you before? DM?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 29, 2010 - 11:50AM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
Because the rules of the game hard-coded caring about people into the way a paladin had to behave. A paladin who failed to care about people enough lost access to all their class abilities.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 29, 2010 - 11:52AM
#37
|
|
|
RP has nothing to do with the edition. If you can RP, then you can do it 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6E..... it won't matter. Though to be fair, my first 4E character was an unaligned charisma paladin who cared more about his hair than helping people One of those "Just because I never could before" things.
Why couldn't you before? DM?
Because you couldn't have an unaligned Paladin in earlier editions?
I'm with Hokus on how you can't complain about the Paladin hindering role-play, but I'm also with Rian_King that the Paladin, by requiring LG, limited the concepts that could have the "paladin mechanics".
4e's Paladin is perfect.
Essentials zigged, when I wanted to continue zagging.
Roll dice, not cars.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 29, 2010 - 11:53AM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Jul 14, 2008
|
Because the rules of the game hard-coded caring about people into the way a paladin had to behave. A paladin who failed to care about people enough lost access to all their class abilities.
So change them. To this day, I still don't get people's strict adherence to rules they don't like. The number one thing I love about D&D, is the ability to change the things I don't like.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 29, 2010 - 12:14PM
#39
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
Because the rules of the game hard-coded caring about people into the way a paladin had to behave. A paladin who failed to care about people enough lost access to all their class abilities.
So change them. To this day, I still don't get people's strict adherence to rules they don't like. The number one thing I love about D&D, is the ability to change the things I don't like.
Changing rules requires the consent of the other people in your play group, particularly the DM. Many people were and still are leery of changing rules.
The paladin, in particular, was considered a very powerful class in 1e and 2e. The alignment restriction was intended as a way to keep the class balanced (under the peculiar definition of "balance" used when talking about those games). House ruling out the alignment restriction of paladins in pre-WotC paldins would also require you to come up with a way to limit their powers. That's more work than most DMs were willing to engage in.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 29, 2010 - 12:15PM
#40
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
First of all, nice Oberoni fallacy. The ability to change a rule doesn't excuse a bad rule. Second of all, he doesn't necessarily have the ability to change things he doesn't like. If he is playing a paladin, he is not the DM. If he is not the DM, he does not have the ability to change any of the games rules. He can request that the DM do so for him. But the answer will not necessarily be a yes. Alternatively, this edition gave him what he wanted right off the bat: the ability to play a paladin without alignment restriction; the ability to play a paladin who does not necessarily care about people.
|
|
|
