The former Tomb of Horrors / current 3e debate thread
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 912, 3 ... 789
Author


Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 2884
Joined: Nov 04, 2004
Last Visit: May 09, 2020

Post Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:50 pm 
 

WOTC has updated their site with their every-so-often look back at the real D&D. This time, it's a Halloween tribute to the Tomb of Horrors, complete with an art gallery and a 3.5 version of the classic module. It all appears to be freely download-able, for those interested.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ag/20051031a

 WWW  

User avatar

Verbose Collector

Posts: 1271
Joined: Jan 09, 2005
Last Visit: Nov 17, 2020
Location: Azeroth

Post Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 2:16 pm 
 

Thanks for the heads up!


Information Superhighway - A Rough Whimper of Insanity - Scott Hansen

  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 405
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
Last Visit: Aug 28, 2007
Location: Orlando, Fl

Post Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:05 pm 
 

And if you hate 3e, at least get the FREE ART. :)


There are no bad editions of D&D, just Boring Players and Unimaginative DMs.

  


Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5611
Joined: Nov 16, 2002
Last Visit: Jan 24, 2021
Location: Wichita, KS, USA

Post Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:31 pm 
 

Thanks for the link Xaxaxe!

While I appreciate the nod toward AD&D, this conversion highlights one of the things I really dislike about 3rd edition:  the power inflation.  Whereas Tomb of Horrors in 1976 was an uber-nasty dungeon that would challenge and devestate entire parties of high-level PCs, repeatedly, now 4-6 9th level characters should reasonably expect to tackle it successfully.  

Le sigh....


Allan Grohe ([email protected])
Greyhawk, grodog Style

Editor and Project Manager, Black Blade Publishing
https://www.facebook.com/BlackBladePublishing/

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 8219
Joined: Jan 21, 2005
Last Visit: Jun 12, 2017
Location: Wallasey, Merseyside, UK

Post Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 2:47 am 
 

grodog wrote:Thanks for the link Xaxaxe!

While I appreciate the nod toward AD&D, this conversion highlights one of the things I really dislike about 3rd edition: the power inflation. Whereas Tomb of Horrors in 1976 was an uber-nasty dungeon that would challenge and devestate entire parties of high-level PCs, repeatedly, now 4-6 9th level characters should reasonably expect to tackle it successfully.

Le sigh....


yeah you can seriously see the power shift now. S1 was always damn hard to complete anyway, even with a super-strong group and it always depleted a strong group very nicely - so the ones who survived really DID breathe a massive sigh of relief.

for me, always was one of the toughest mods out there.

shame to see it being toppled and made to look more average in 3E, a great shame indeed.

does highlight why i dont like 3E very clearly.



  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 405
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
Last Visit: Aug 28, 2007
Location: Orlando, Fl

Post Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:33 pm 
 

grodog wrote:Thanks for the link Xaxaxe!

While I appreciate the nod toward AD&D, this conversion highlights one of the things I really dislike about 3rd edition: the power inflation. Whereas Tomb of Horrors in 1976 was an uber-nasty dungeon that would challenge and devestate entire parties of high-level PCs, repeatedly, now 4-6 9th level characters should reasonably expect to tackle it successfully.

Le sigh....


A truly wicked GM can kill ANY characters with a paper clip, rubber band, and one goblin. ;)


There are no bad editions of D&D, just Boring Players and Unimaginative DMs.

  


Sage Collector

Posts: 2639
Joined: Jan 23, 2003
Last Visit: Jan 11, 2006

Post Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:19 pm 
 

MrFilthyIke wrote:A truly wicked GM can kill ANY characters with a paper clip, rubber band, and one goblin. ;)

*listens* ^^

  

User avatar

Verbose Collector
Valuation Board

Posts: 1883
Joined: Nov 16, 2002
Last Visit: Jan 25, 2021
Location: Ohio, The land without sun

Post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:12 am 
 

Once I had a group that wanted to go through it, but changed their mind after three rooms.  Guess they didn't like all of the traps and the fact that both of their thieves were incapacitated...

  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 8219
Joined: Jan 21, 2005
Last Visit: Jun 12, 2017
Location: Wallasey, Merseyside, UK

Post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 2:23 am 
 

yeah i have had a whole group of 7 good players get totally decimated by S1 within an hour. and that wasnt even trying hard - well not overly :D



  


Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3066
Joined: Jul 09, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 30, 2015

Post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 9:13 am 
 

MrFilthyIke wrote:A truly wicked GM can kill ANY characters with a paper clip, rubber band, and one goblin. ;)

Of course they can.  Have you seen goblins recently?  Just give 'im "Great Cleave".  :lol:  

If I was GMing this module, I'd add a feature from Baal's lair in Diablo II -- if you stop moving for more than about 3 seconds, a magical trap blasts you with poison/fire/lightning/cold.  That should even up the odds quite nicely.   :twisted:

 YIM  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 405
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
Last Visit: Aug 28, 2007
Location: Orlando, Fl

Post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:11 pm 
 

deimos3428 wrote:I'd add a feature from Baal's lair in Diablo II -- if you stop moving for more than about 3 seconds, a magical trap blasts you with poison/fire/lightning/cold.


That actually sound rather appropriate


There are no bad editions of D&D, just Boring Players and Unimaginative DMs.

  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 752
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
Last Visit: Aug 09, 2020
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada, eh?

Post Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:19 pm 
 

A pretty bizarre level to convert the module to, imo. A lot of the stuff in the original T1 is stuff I'd expect to find at ~15th level in 3E.

This isn't representative of 3rd Edition changing the game, it's representative of a dumbass conversion.

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 8219
Joined: Jan 21, 2005
Last Visit: Jun 12, 2017
Location: Wallasey, Merseyside, UK

Post Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:57 pm 
 

GraysonAC wrote: in the original T1 .


T1 or S1?

S1 is for levels 10-14 anyway. saying that. even at them levels its pretty damn hard.

Al



  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 232
Joined: Nov 16, 2004
Last Visit: Oct 30, 2017

Post Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 1:00 pm 
 

GraysonAC wrote:A pretty bizarre level to convert the module to, imo. A lot of the stuff in the original T1 is stuff I'd expect to find at ~15th level in 3E.

This isn't representative of 3rd Edition changing the game, it's representative of a dumbass conversion.


I half agree with you.  I'd say this conversion is representative of the style of gaming that 3e has created...

  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3861
Joined: Feb 21, 2004
Last Visit: Aug 21, 2020
Location: Milford, Michigan

Post Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:17 pm 
 

I was always of the opinion that S1 was pretty much level neutral. What I mean is that characters should be in the range, but in no way does that guarantee success...or survival for that matter. I don't think a 14th fighter vs a 10 level fighter has much more chance to survive (1 ed.). The player has to be smart and cool under pressure and relatively lucky. Crap in 1 ed you had to be good and lucky to survive to level 10 - and once there you had to be even more careful. 1st ed. AD&D is and was tough and the threat of death is constant. You cannot say that about 3E. And once that element is gone, S1 loses all its character and shall I say "charm."


And I could've bought these damn modules off the 1$ rack!!!

New modules for your Old School game http://pacesettergames.com/

Everything Pacesetter at http://pacesettergames.blog.com/

 WWW  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 752
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
Last Visit: Aug 09, 2020
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada, eh?

Post Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 4:28 pm 
 

S1, not T1. Sorry.

I was always of the opinion that S1 was pretty much level neutral. What I mean is that characters should be in the range, but in no way does that guarantee success...or survival for that matter. I don't think a 14th fighter vs a 10 level fighter has much more chance to survive


Definately agree. S1 didn't have so much to do with the character, but the player playing it. A dumb or careless player running a high level character is going to die, regardless of level.

1st ed. AD&D is and was tough and the threat of death is constant. You cannot say that about 3E


Um.. ok? Bbarsh, have you actually played a 3E campaign? My games have more player deaths than my 2nd Edition games ever had. 3E actually has enemy power scale a bit faster than player power - monsters get abilities at the mid-levels that players simply don't get (such as Improved Grab, Rend, Rake, the godawfully dangerous Pounce, for those that actually know the system) that are player-killers. Players, on the other hand, don't get anything the enemy doesn't ;)

I have a lot of respect for most folks on this board, but honestly, it really, really seems like a lot of the talk about 3E is coming straight out of posteriors, not from experience.

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 8219
Joined: Jan 21, 2005
Last Visit: Jun 12, 2017
Location: Wallasey, Merseyside, UK

Post Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 5:00 pm 
 

GraysonAC wrote:I have a lot of respect for most folks on this board, but honestly, it really, really seems like a lot of the talk about 3E is coming straight out of posteriors, not from experience.


heheheheh :)

well i for one CAN say i have played one game of 3E so i can justify any argument i come up with as i have at least tried the format.

in the end its each to their own.

i done even like 2E either so at least you cant say i am biased against 3E :D

i like 1E because its quick and simple and its about ROLEPLAY not dice rolls and tables.

i found when i played the 3E game (which i actually got up and left in mid-game) i spent so much time trying to figure out all the skills and calculate stuff all the time, that i got no enjoyment out of the scenario or the role play at all.

maybe that was just me *shrugs*

i gave it a go anyway but there ya go :D

Al



  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 752
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
Last Visit: Aug 09, 2020
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada, eh?

Post Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 6:56 pm 
 

killjoy32 wrote:i like 1E because its quick and simple and its about ROLEPLAY not dice rolls and tables.


That's the kind of stuff I understand - folks not liking 3E because it's a different style than the original game. It's very different. That's a dislike based on the game philosophy.

i found when i played the 3E game (which i actually got up and left in mid-game) i spent so much time trying to figure out all the skills and calculate stuff all the time, that i got no enjoyment out of the scenario or the role play at all.

maybe that was just me *shrugs*


*nods* Definately not just you. 3E is way, way more complicated as far as rules go. That's why I have to laugh when I see folks here saying things like "3E is meant for younger gamers" - no 12 year old is going to figure out 3E ;)  Our group is still looking stuff up all the time, and we've been playing once or twice a week for a few years now.

 WWW  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3590
Joined: Dec 20, 2003
Last Visit: Jan 23, 2021
Location: Canada

Post Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 7:53 pm 
 

I have played all the editions from start to finish, 1st ed, 2nd ed, 3rd ed and now 3.5.

I find that the latest version simply the best game in the market today.  Totally flexible, well supported and a huge fan base.  I play in a game (I am the DM) in which you have to be mature with a full time job and be able to show up consistantly.  When our group is in need of another player, we have a line of people wanting to join (All older 30+ years), if you have the right crew, 3.5 rules.  

No question, few restrictions, tons of unique classes, lots of options.  I find as long as you stick to the published Wizards stuff, the game is well balenced and includes lots of oppurtunity for great gaming.

J


Games can get you through times of no money but money can not get you through times of no games!!

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Jul 24, 2020

Post Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 10:00 pm 
 

One argument against 3.5 that I think has no merit:

    "The PC's are just superheroes with comic book powers."

     Yes, the system gives maximum player choice and has great flexibility.  Yes, a good player can create a rules stack that gives his PC an edge.

    BUT...the monsters pack much of the same punch in 3.5 as the PC's do.  The monsters are harder to create and harder to balance, but they receive just about every benefit the PC's receive.  

    In the first edition of AD&D, an 11th level fighter would not really be even slightly afraid of a single cloud giant.  This was even more true after the publication of Unearthed Arcana sent the rules spinning out of control.  After Unearthed Arcana, an 11th level fighter with a +3 sword could be expected to massacre almost every creature in the Monster Manual single-handed, and possibly take almost no damage.

    In 3.5, unless the fighter is packing some serious magic items to save his armored butt, he had better run.  Preferably, he should run past his companions so that the giant (who is faster than him) will have someone else to kill while he escapes.  

    And that is the BASE cloud giant.  The rules specifically state that Monster Manual 3.5 monsters are just the BASIC and most COMMON versions of the monsters.  It is possible to keep the players guessing in virtually every encounter if the DM knows his craft at all.

    I suspect that a certain number of those who really liked the first editions of D&D (particularly those who became DM's) enjoyed arguing about the rules.  The 3.5 game plays better, longer and has far fewer arguments.

Mark


"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."

  
Next
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 912, 3 ... 789