Traveller wrote:The 1st and 2d Edition versions of the spell are identical in that regard, so to recap:1. Player of the raised character must make a successful system shock roll, or the character is irrevocably dead. Success reduces CON permanently by 1.2. Raised character has one hit point.3. Raised character is confined to bed for a number of days equal to the time the character was dead.
For d20 Fantasy though, it became not just a rule, but a requirement.
Sometimes having a "tight" ruleset is a curse, especially if you have to change a rule that doesn't suit your tastes. Because you have to change all the rules that are affected by the rule change. I use Attack of Opportunity as a simple example of the interdependency of the rules
The beauty of the system though is that unlike d20 Fantasy, where the rules are interdependent, Castles & Crusades is modular.
bbarsh wrote:And I am not sure comparing a 3.5 ed. Clould Giant to a 1 ed. Cloud Giant is apples to apples. The 3.5 Cloud has been adjusted to deal with our new and improved Mr. 3.5. The accurate comparison is a nonUA 1st ed. fighter to a standard MM Clould Giant. Then we have Mr. 3.5 (11th level fighter). With carefully chosen feats he is can "cleave" his way through similarly powered monsters at the same rate.
MShipley88 wrote: ...I still stand by my "giants had no chance argument." They didn't...even in early 1st edition AD&D, and even in a campaign like mine, where magic items were hard to come by....
bclarkie wrote:MShipley88 wrote: 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.Dude seriously, did your DM allow the monsters to think at all or did they just stand there and go toe to toe with your group of 20 characters. I can guarentee that if you are playing the game the way it is supposed to be played allowing the giants for appropriate bonuses for strength and playing the giant as the intelligent being that he/she is supposed to be, that a 11th level character should have a very difficult time at best
MShipley88 wrote: 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.
MShipley88 wrote:bclarkie wrote:MShipley88 wrote: 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.Dude seriously, did your DM allow the monsters to think at all or did they just stand there and go toe to toe with your group of 20 characters. I can guarentee that if you are playing the game the way it is supposed to be played allowing the giants for appropriate bonuses for strength and playing the giant as the intelligent being that he/she is supposed to be, that a 11th level character should have a very difficult time at best I don't recall any monster bonuses for strength in 1st edition. There were also no constitution or dexterity bonuses for monsters. There was one place in the DM Guide where giant strength was quantified for the purposes of wearing a Girdle of Fire Giant Strength, but the actual strength of any given monster was calculated into the base damage with no bonuses to hit other than the standard attack chart that was eventually replaced with a THACO score. Giving ability scores and bonuses to monster is exactly the strength of 3.5.
GraysonAC wrote:I haven't read anything about C&C, but I honestly can't see any game system as "modular". Game balance isn't a series of unconnected factors - doing something like you mentioned, adding the Sorcerer to the game, would affect a lot of other things. Each "module" of the rules would have to be balanced against each other to keep a good game, and that makes them interdependant by their very nature.
GraysonAC wrote: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.
killjoy32 wrote: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 have too agree with Diemos here. I hate the way 3.5 looks and feels. It might play fine, but it is not the D&D that I associaite with. It never will be, and that is ok, too. To me, 3.5 brought out all the things I hated about power gamers who mutilated earlier versions to make their super characters of everything slaying. There seems to be no sense of balance. Everything has its place. An orc is an orc - yeah, the orc king might be 5 hit dice, so what. In 3.5 that orc king could be the equal to 15th level fighter and slaughter an entire army by himself. Shipley - Not to be critical. But what the hell kind of game were you playing where an 11th level 1 ed fighter can wipe out a Cloud giant without taking damage? If that was the norm for your group, then something was seriously wrong with your game. (at least compared to our group)
GraysonAC wrote:Everything has its place. An orc is an orc - yeah, the orc king might be 5 hit dice, so what. In 3.5 that orc king could be the equal to 15th level fighter and slaughter an entire army by himself.Honestly, does that make any sense to you? That because it's an orc, it's always going to just be an orc? In 3.5, that orc could very well be tough enough to challenge the entire damn party. In 1st/2nd, it was just another speedbump.
Everything has its place. An orc is an orc - yeah, the orc king might be 5 hit dice, so what. In 3.5 that orc king could be the equal to 15th level fighter and slaughter an entire army by himself.
MShipley88 wrote:bbarsh wrote:Shipley - Not to be critical. But what the hell kind of game were you playing where an 11th level 1 ed fighter can wipe out a Cloud giant without taking damage? If that was the norm for your group, then something was seriously wrong with your game. (at least compared to our group) OK, so SOME damage. But, a first edition 11th level fighter with even a moderately magical suit of armor, a +3 sword and double specialization could chop up a cloud giant (12d8 hit dice, average of 54 hit points, one swing, no strength bonuses to hit, no constitution bonus, no skills, slow and only a ceremonial armor class) without much worry. Reducing all character stats down to 12 (no bonuses) might prolong the agony, but the result would be the same...particularly if PC magic-users were also involved. In fact, the first and second edition game tended to break down when the party fighters reached 7th level and/or the mages reached 9th level...particularly after Unearthed Arcana made all of the Dragon magazine material official. In fact 9th or 10th level was usually the level at which we started a new group of characters because it made no logical game sense to populate a region with literally hundreds of huge monsters for the party to chop up while laughing and drinking wine from crystal goblets without spilling a drop. By comparison, last night a couple of basic 3.5 cloud giants (2 of them), with nothing but the stats right out of the book, sent my campaign's party of seven 10th and 11th level PC's screaming in terror and trying to hide from giants who could run faster than them, hit harder than them and utilize all of the same combat skills of the party's fighters. 8) Much fun. :wink: Mark
bbarsh wrote:Shipley - Not to be critical. But what the hell kind of game were you playing where an 11th level 1 ed fighter can wipe out a Cloud giant without taking damage? If that was the norm for your group, then something was seriously wrong with your game. (at least compared to our group)
GraysonAC wrote:I Dmed a 3E campaign for a while, and I tried so hard to force people to roleplay that I nearly burned myself out on gaming.Again, a problem with people, not with the system. Your problem is with non-rp players, not with the system you're using. The guys in my 3E game are as focused on their 'build' as anybody else - and they also roleplay the characters created. One of my players wants to pick up the Aasimar template (he's a 15th level Favored Soul), not because it gives any particular advantage (it's not actually a good choice, power-wise, for him), but because it makes sense with his character and the setting. He's using the rules to further roleplaying. Imagine that, the system actually helps that.
I Dmed a 3E campaign for a while, and I tried so hard to force people to roleplay that I nearly burned myself out on gaming.
GraysonAC wrote:Traveller wrote:Raise Dead in AD&D had very nasty (and balancing) side effects. If you survived the system shock roll, you were revived with one hit point and had to spend one week in bed for every level you were. In d20 Fantasy, there is no system shock roll, and you return to play immediately with one hit point for every level you are.Ah. Well, I certainly concede that then. I do remember the system shock roll, although I think by 2nd Edition (again, if memory serves), there was no bed rest required.I happen to agree that raising characters from the dead is too easy. In my game, Raise Dead (normally 5th) takes the place of Ressurection (7th), and Ressurection gets moved to True Ressurection (9th). True Res is the domain of the Powers only, not players or NPC spellcasters.
Traveller wrote:Raise Dead in AD&D had very nasty (and balancing) side effects. If you survived the system shock roll, you were revived with one hit point and had to spend one week in bed for every level you were. In d20 Fantasy, there is no system shock roll, and you return to play immediately with one hit point for every level you are.