The former Tomb of Horrors / current 3e debate thread
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 5 of 912, 3, 4, 5, 6789
Author


Prolific Collector

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:04 am 
 

Traveller wrote:Show me an average d20 Fantasy player that can describe what their character looks like and what his personality is?


Again, a people problem, not a system problem. Your average d20 player is going to be way younger than your average AD&D player ;)

Honestly, more and more this sounds like yelling at kids to get off your yard :P

Every person in my 3.5 game could tell you that in detail. Hell, I'm actually creating a character for someone in the group - she's basing her character off a miniature. She chose personality, and doesn't even particularily care what the stats/abilities are, as long as they're useful and fun to play.

I dunno, maybe you guys just have really crappy and/or young gamers where you live? When I play at local store gamedays (Living Eberron no less), there's always a ton of roleplaying. Ditto for the local conventions.

"He's got an 18/00 strength with X, Y, and Z abilities."


18/00 strength eh? Mixing your systems :P

 WWW  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 130
Joined: Mar 20, 2005
Last Visit: Mar 31, 2018
Location: Minneapolis

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 9:42 am 
 

Just to drive the point home -

I had the opportunity to listen to Monte Cook during a Q/A session on Games Day.   The question was posed, "How will 4E be different from 3E?".   His answered (as best as I can remember) seems to address the issues in the 1E/2E vs 3E debate.   And Monte forgive me if this is nowhere near correct.    He stated that while he has little knowledge of the 4E system changes, he can comment on the 3E design process.   The intent, he says, was to retain the cornerstones/sacred cows of the 1E/2E system, but buidl something completely new from there.   The cornerstones / sacred cows were 3d6 stats, retain the same 6 stats, alignment, concept of armor class, and the hit point structure.   Beyond that, everything was open for change.    Thus, it seems, even to Monte,  1E/2E is a different game than 3E.

In addition, I had the opportunity to play a session in his Ptolus campaign.  All of the characters we were give were not maxed out in any way.  Most characters had one combat feat and one non-combat feat.    We had a great time and I am now a 3E believer.   IF the game is controlled and managed by a competent DM who has pulled together a quality group of players.   Hey, as the DM, give me the backstory on why you have 10 combat feats, but still have not learned how to read . . . punk!!    

Will I mix my 1E/2E games (or even C&C) with 3E?   No.   Would I play 3E again.   Sure.

Shameless Monte plug - I am totally hooked on Ptolus.   Grtitty and dirty, with lots of meat on its bones.

  

User avatar

Prolific Collector

Posts: 851
Joined: Jun 12, 2004
Last Visit: May 02, 2021

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 1:25 pm 
 

GraysonAC wrote:
Traveller wrote:"He's got an 18/00 strength with X, Y, and Z abilities."


18/00 strength eh? Mixing your systems :P

:lol:   I mixed them.  Forgot that there is no exceptional strength in d20 Fantasy.  And yes, them not being able to describe what the character is or looks like because they were totally focused on player stats is a player problem.  The problem is that the player in the anecdote is the average d20 Fantasy player, as Peter had encountered this problem repeatedly over the three days of Gen Con.

I did leave open the possibility that there would be a d20 Fantasy player who actually had thought his character through a little bit more than his skillz, kewl powerz, and his abilitiez.  However, as I said before, they are very rare, and likely longtime AD&D players.



  


Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 1:52 pm 
 

GraysonAC wrote:I'm not "fighting" anything ...


Are you sure about that? You've got 13 posts in this thread ...

 WWW  


Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 1:56 pm 
 

Xaxaxe wrote: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


I'll take a stab at getting this thread back to somewhere near its original intent: did anyone actually download the damn thing?

 WWW  


Prolific Collector

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 2:22 pm 
 

Xaxaxe wrote:
GraysonAC wrote:I'm not "fighting" anything ...


Are you sure about that? You've got 13 posts in this thread ...


Oh, I'll debate this until our fingers fall off. But I'm not going to be dissapointed if I don't change any minds. I know how hard it is for old dogs to learn new tricks  :lol:

(Put the sword down, I've got a 28 AC.. er.. wait, you're using THAC0? Crap!)

did anyone actually download the damn thing?


I did. Honestly, it's a piece of steaming crap. I like the original module a lot, but this one.. not so much. It depends really, really heavily on traps, and a lot of the traps just aren't as dangerous in 3E as they would have been in 1E or 2E.

And the Demilich fight would just be a slaughter, unless the group still had someone capable of doing massive melee damage.

 WWW  


Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:06 pm 
 

MShipley88 wrote:
deimos3428 wrote:I don't see any modifications to the fighter class in UA at all, unless you're referring to comeliness, social class, or weaponless combat... :? Barbarian/Cavalier, sure...they were experiments gone awry that unfortunately spawned what we have today. :wink:


 See also: "weapon specialization" and "double weapon specialization."

Ok, fair enough.  I missed that in my rapid flip-thru (pg. 18 is actually loose and fell on the floor!).  Still isn't much of an advantage, in my not-so-humble opinion -- and if it was too great, it's easily compensated against:  

"Hmm...everyone's spent their weapon profs. in bastard sword yet again...guess we won't be seeing a magical one of those anytime soon..."  :twisted:

Compared with a say, a Female Drow Paladin (UA version), weapon specialization is peanuts.  I had hoped they would have fixed these sort of "power loopholes" by now.  Instead, they seem to be creating more, and trying to balance them.

 YIM  


Prolific Collector

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:13 pm 
 

deimos3428 wrote:I had hoped they would have fixed these sort of "power loopholes" by now. Instead, they seem to be creating more, and trying to balance them.


It's not a 'power loophole' if it's balanced though ;)

The female drow example is funny to me, since the character I'm creating for one of my players (as mentioned before), happens to be a female drow. She's a bard/virtuoso though, not a paladin ;)

 WWW  


Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:24 pm 
 

Traveller wrote:
GraysonAC wrote: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.

I forgot the Constitution loss for making the system shock roll (CON permanently reduced by 1), but that's a minor thing. :)

Actually, it is a very, very major thing.  The initial constitution score of the character limited the number of times a character could be raised/ressurected.  This number could never be changed, even if the constitution was later restored in some manner.  Far more severe than a mere level of experience loss.

 YIM  


Sage Collector

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:46 pm 
 

deimos3428 wrote:
Traveller wrote:I forgot the Constitution loss for making the system shock roll (CON permanently reduced by 1), but that's a minor thing. :)

Actually, it is a very, very major thing. The initial constitution score of the character limited the number of times a character could be raised/ressurected. This number could never be changed, even if the constitution was later restored in some manner. Far more severe than a mere level of experience loss.

*mutters something about people "forgetting" things that had been posted on another thread, earlier the same day* ;)
http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14478

(And here's me thinking you read everything, Traveller :)) *friendly jab* ^^

  


Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:47 pm 
 

Deadlord36 wrote:If you give fire giants +4/+10, then you need to give dragons +6/+12 or some such, and pruple worms the same.

Ummm....they did that already, I think.  I'm pretty sure the numbers are higher for dragons, though.  It's not pretty, anyway.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the d20 system. It is the ridiculous powers and characters that are in the game.

Agreed.  Roll whatever dice you want.  Or no dice at all.  Or whatever.
Let's see someone come forward and name a 3E player that they know that adds skill points to etiquette. Or weaving. Or forgery. No, can;t do that, it would be wasting points......
I don't really blame 3.5 for this one, except that they didn't scrap a bad idea when they had a chance.  Non-weapon feats (proficiencies!) are poorly written backstory footnotes at best, and an obscure attempts to get an edge at worst.  Roleplaying isn't about backstories, it's about forestories.  (Ok, I made that word up, but you get the point.)  Unless you're really going to spend an entire D&D session pretending to be weaving...  :roll:
Of the General feats in the Player's Handbook 68 out of 90 are combat related. That is well over 2/3. The addition of Feats in 3E is what ruins the game. No player, not even myself, can avoid min/maxing feats and skills in 3E, and that is not roleplaying, it's powergaming.

Thank god for small mercies!  Non-weapon feats are even more lame than weapon feats!

 YIM  


Sage Collector

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:57 pm 
 

deimos3428 wrote:Non-weapon feats (proficiencies!) are poorly written backstory footnotes at best, and an obscure attempts to get an edge at worst. Roleplaying isn't about backstories, it's about forestories. (Ok, I made that word up, but you get the point.)

Not sure I'd agree with that totally, but in general it's not usually about backplay. :P


:lol:

Maybe that wasn't the best analogy...


=
p.s. What is up with that poor avvy of yours, Deimos?

  


Prolific Collector

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:05 pm 
 

deimos3428 wrote:Actually, it is a very, very major thing. The initial constitution score of the character limited the number of times a character could be raised/ressurected. This number could never be changed, even if the constitution was later restored in some manner. Far more severe than a mere level of experience loss.


I don't see it as a major thing, as I've never played or ran a campaign where any character was raised from the dead more than a handful of times (at most). If your games have characters getting brought back from the dead 10+ times, then we're running games with very different feels.

A loss of a level is a massive penalty that the player feels immediately, and one that doesn't go away for a long time. You lose character strength, and that's something that makes for one heck of a deterrant ;)

If the penalty was losing a point of Con in 3.5, that would also hurt like a kick in the crotch from a fire giant (and they get their strength bonuses :P), but that's because of the way hit points work (+1hp/level for every two points of Con above 10). Going from 14 Con to 13 Con doesn't change anything in 1E, if memory serves. At worst, you lose a point to some of your saving throws (which is mirrored in 3.5, as you'd lose a +1 to your Fortitude save if you dropped to an odd Con score).

 WWW  


Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:22 pm 
 

GraysonAC wrote:The female drow example is funny to me, since the character I'm creating for one of my players (as mentioned before), happens to be a female drow. She's a bard/virtuoso though, not a paladin ;)

Well, the female drow paladin is the supreme badass in 1st Edition.  At only 5th level, you could conceivably have the following:

5d10+3 hp (plus constitution bonuses, if any)
detect evil (at will)
+2 save vs. everything
lay on hands
cure disease once a week
protection from evil, 10' radius
turn undead (as 3rd cleric)
call warhorse
3 attacks per round (drow ambidexterity, and wielding two paladin "weapons of choice")
+1 to hit with lance (mounted)
+1 to hit (broadsword or longsword or scimitar)
+1 to hit (horseman's mace or flail or pick)
+5 to damage with lance (mounted)
+1 to damage with lance (unmounted)
parrying ability
can ride a unicorn
str, dex, con, and chr increase with level, and racial limits do not apply
immune to fear
protection from fear, 10 radius
90% immunity to mind-affecting spells
+2 vs. illusions
continue to live up to -13 hp (but not fight)
elven resistance to sleep and charm
+2 vs magic
infravision
elven secret door detection
dwarven underground/stonework detections
elven silent movement
elven surprise
innate spells: (dancing lights, faerie fire, darkness 5', detect magic, know alignment, levitate, clairvoyance, clairaudience, detect lie, suggestion, dispel magic)

And of course, at higher levels, it gets worse.
Whew.  Or, you could play a human fighter.  :roll:

 YIM  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:24 pm 
 

actually guys, after reading that thread on dragonsfoot and further stuff here, i put this one to you.... grayson, i would be interested too, if 3E deals with this in any way....

on dragonsfoot, they are going on about the CON score and saying you can be raised X times depending on your CON score, ie. 15, allows you to be raised 15 times... ok?

even frank himself was confirming this "limiting the amount of times a character can be raised"

my question is this:

if you look at the constitution table in the players handbook, it has "minimum scores" for a number of classes and races. if you are any of them, and your score goes lower....what happens then?

if youre a dwarf and then it goes lower...does that mean you cant be a dwarf :D

say youre a 12th level ranger...does it mean you suddenly cant be a ranger?

how does everyone approach this situation in their games?

Al



  


Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6463
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 04, 2021

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:26 pm 
 

GraysonAC wrote:
deimos3428 wrote:Actually, it is a very, very major thing. The initial constitution score of the character limited the number of times a character could be raised/ressurected. This number could never be changed, even if the constitution was later restored in some manner. Far more severe than a mere level of experience loss.


I don't see it as a major thing, as I've never played or ran a campaign where any character was raised from the dead more than a handful of times (at most). If your games have characters getting brought back from the dead 10+ times, then we're running games with very different feels.

A loss of a level is a massive penalty that the player feels immediately, and one that doesn't go away for a long time. You lose character strength, and that's something that makes for one heck of a deterrant ;)

If the penalty was losing a point of Con in 3.5, that would also hurt like a kick in the crotch from a fire giant (and they get their strength bonuses :P), but that's because of the way hit points work (+1hp/level for every two points of Con above 10). Going from 14 Con to 13 Con doesn't change anything in 1E, if memory serves. At worst, you lose a point to some of your saving throws (which is mirrored in 3.5, as you'd lose a +1 to your Fortitude save if you dropped to an odd Con score).


One thing about decreasing Constitution score  though that has been overlooked so far, is the fact that as your Constitution decreases so does your System Shock numbers. :wink:  When your System Shock percentage numbers decrease it also means that it is harder to raise you successfully, so dying and ressurecting in 1st edition you kind of get double whammied. :twisted:


"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Neitzche

  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3593
Joined: Dec 20, 2003
Last Visit: May 10, 2021
Location: Canada

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:27 pm 
 

killjoy32 wrote:actually guys, after reading that thread on dragonsfoot and further stuff here, i put this one to you.... grayson, i would be interested too, if 3E deals with this in any way....

on dragonsfoot, they are going on about the CON score and saying you can be raised X times depending on your CON score, ie. 15, allows you to be raised 15 times... ok?

even frank himself was confirming this "limiting the amount of times a character can be raised"

my question is this:

if you look at the constitution table in the players handbook, it has "minimum scores" for a number of classes and races. if you are any of them, and your score goes lower....what happens then?

if youre a dwarf and then it goes lower...does that mean you cant be a dwarf :D

say youre a 12th level ranger...does it mean you suddenly cant be a ranger?

how does everyone approach this situation in their games?

Al


Never happened in my game, characters have never been in that situation!


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

 WWW  


Prolific Collector

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:39 pm 
 

killjoy32 wrote:grayson, i would be interested too, if 3E deals with this in any way....


There's no hard-cap on ressurections in 3E. The spell itself costs 5k in diamonds (or 10k for Ressurection [only need a piece of the corpse], 25k for True Ressurection [no corpse required]), has a time limit, and when the person is raised, they immediately lose a level. If they were 1st level at the time, they lose a point of Con. (Although I can't see any 1st level PC's getting raised without one heckuva story reason :P)

if youre a dwarf and then it goes lower...does that mean you cant be a dwarf :D


There's no race restrictions or level caps in 3E. Personally, I always thought that was one of the least sensical and most annoying things about the old D&D (and later AD&D).  I could never think of a particularily good reason why a devout dwarf couldn't be a paladin, or why races other than humans were capped in levels (other than to make playing a human more appealing).

 WWW  


Prolific Collector

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:41 pm 
 

bclarkie wrote:One thing about decreasing Constitution though that has been overlooked so far is the fact that as your Constitution decreases so does your System Shock numbers. :wink:  When your System SHock numbers decrease it also means that it is harder to raise you successfully, so dying and ressurecting in 1st edition you kind of get double whammied. :twisted:


Heh, true. And the chance of failure on that SS roll is pretty high once you get out of the high teens (assuming you were lucky enough to start there!)

 WWW  


Sage Collector

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

Post Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:42 pm 
 

bclarkie wrote:When your System SHock numbers decrease it also means that it is harder to raise you successfully, so dying and ressurecting in 1st edition you kind of get double whammied. :twisted:

Sounds like a good incentive to avoid getting your characters killed in the first place: would have said that might be the biggest "whammy" ;)

Gee... a rule designed to encourage sensible roleplaying; who'd've expected that?! :D

  
PreviousNext
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 5 of 912, 3, 4, 5, 6789