Deadlord36 wrote:OK, let's see which side of the scale gets more weight.

I think it's obvious, so I question the validity of the poll.  I'll have to abstain on this one.  Besides, we have bigger poll issues up here in Canada right now.  

Friends don't let friends play 3E.  :twisted:

I went with 3E is decent as it seems to be okay - don't know if I'd say it was as good as 1E, but it has some positive points.



Not that I will ever get a chance to play D&D in the near future, but I can see it's lure.  It was hard enough keeping a sustained campaign going back in the day - we started getting jobs, other social draws, college, moving, etc.



At least with 3E you can make some quick character progression before things falls apart . . . I can't tell you how many campaigns I was in where characters never made it beyond 4th or 5th level . . . and then the campaign just died . . .



Of course, if I was DMing there would be some heavy rule modifications, but I think a balance between d20 and 1E could be found.

The input is appreciated, guys.

bbarsh wrote:If I were to pick a single rpg to play today, it would NOT be 3e.



20 years ago, hands down 1e.

20 years ago, Rolemaster, phps. 25 years ago, 1e. JMO

(And in later years the former did exactly the same with regards rulesbook "splurge" even if it never did turn into a video game.

Back in 1985 it had pretty much the right balance of detail and workable game mechanics for my purposes).

I have never actually tried to play 3e, but I have tried to read through a few of the books and they just dont do anything for me. There are just way way to many statistics and rules for me.  It reminds me a lot of reading a Prob/Stat text book. Just very boring.

Wow, the nays have it. OK, I feel vindicated!

I don't want to give the wrong impression, there's nothing wrong with 3e. It's just that.....well......it sucks.

I'll be honest and say I do like 3rd Ed. I don't feel guilty for saying this at all. A set of rules is just a set of rules. A good GM and a good group of players is the key to good roleplaying and not the rule book, the way it's presented or, indeed, the rules themslves.



Most of the folks here that post are 30+ and in the same way we're probably not listening to the same music at 14 - 18 years old that 14 -18 year olds are currently listening to doesn't give us the right to demean their choice in that. The world moves and I've had to accept that The Clash simply aren't a punk band of choice any more and nor is 1st Ed Ad'n'd a system of choice for younger players.



I'm glad the hobby still survives in an any form given that there's now 24/7 roleplaying online. At least the younger generation are still playing in some form or other. Things could be alot worse in all honesty...



Sorry if this post seems antagonistic but "The King is dead, long live the King" to some extent...

I've enjoyed the 3.x games that I've played, but they were with some pretty diehard Greyhawk folks, so the fact that the games were 3.x was relatively inconsequential.  



That said, I submitted "bites" also, purely from a game design standpoint, because even with all of the EL, CRs, balanced magic items relative to the level of the challenge, tailored vs. status quo encouners, etc., etc. etc., that do in fact make 3.x into a mathematical nightmare, putting a module together as a DM is still an art, not a science, only I have to do advanced calculus (or use Excel all the time) to insure that I'm statting my NPCs properly.  Grrrr.  I hate that, especially when I want to wing stuff in a game.