Jump to content

Dungeons & Dragons

n0Mad

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Timata Newbie

Timata

Posted
Posted

I never got to play 1st edition, I started with Advanced 2nd. I have one of the chainmail books in one of the boxes around here though.

I like 4th because it makes it more accessible to my group, without dumbing it down. A lot of the rules make sense, like attack rolls for spells and things of that nature. And it is a huge step up from 3rd, and i never could stand 2nd.

*thinks about THAC0 and runs screaming into the night*

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raev Collaborator

Raev

Posted
Posted

2nd Ed was in my opinion by FAR the best there was.

I've done and am doing the 3.5 now...and sure I like that you can customize the character a lot more now than ever before but there are still some things that I stand strongly against in it. Case in point - dwarven spellcasters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timata Newbie

Timata

Posted
Posted

I didn;t care for 3rd edition and 3.5...

In hindsight 3 and 3.5 were pretty crappy. I'm just finding that 4th is a good fit for my group, a whole lot less work for the DM (me) and easier to grasp rules for my players (some of whom wouldn't have touched 2nd or 3rd because of the overall complexity).

4th edition combat plays more like a tactics game than previous editions (we are up to our 2nd session of the real thing, and we did 2-3 sessions of the pre-release demo), It also has encounters that rely primarily on your skills (that involve the whole group, not just the rogue).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
n0Mad Collaborator

n0Mad

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I've only glanced at the PHB so I really don't know anything yet. But ... Why'd they ditch some classes that have been around since AD&D and why ditch half-orc in favor of dragon kin or whatever? And what's up with having something listed for every single level of advancement? It looks like they turned it into a video game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timata Newbie

Timata

Posted
Posted

I've only glanced at the PHB so I really don't know anything yet. But ... Why'd they ditch some classes that have been around since AD&D and why ditch half-orc in favor of dragon kin or whatever? And what's up with having something listed for every single level of advancement? It looks like they turned it into a video game.

Druid/bard/monk/barbarian will be put out soon, they are putting the classes in books according to origin of power. So ranger/rogue/warrior =martial

Paladin/cleric=divine

Wizard/warlock=arcane

I was pleased to find out that sorcerer no longer exists and hope it doesn't get released in the future. It was so close to wizard it was pointless.

Druid and barbarian will probably be in the same book, I have no idea what the bards power origins would be though. they are releasing the books this way so they can provide new content alongside the staples.

As far as getting something every level, be it a feat, class power, or some other thing, what's so bad about that. Every level has meaning besides another 5 hit points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
n0Mad Collaborator

n0Mad

Posted
  • Author
Posted

What happened to the good ol' days of the PHB having everything you needed to play the game with the supplements merely enhancing the game? So, if you want to play a barbarian, bard, or monk you have to wait until another book? That's fucked up.

I was chatting with a friend about the "something every level" aspect and it sounds like your path is laid out for you with very little choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timata Newbie

Timata

Posted
Posted

What happened to the good ol' days of the PHB having everything you needed to play the game with the supplements merely enhancing the game? So, if you want to play a barbarian, bard, or monk you have to wait until another book? That's fucked up.

I was chatting with a friend about the "something every level" aspect and it sounds like your path is laid out for you with very little choice.

Honestly the PHB does have everything you need to play. A variety of classes to cover most of the essential party roles. In 3rd, if you wanted to play as a psion, samurai, or any other of the million classes released for that edition, you'd have to get a supplement. You don't have to play a bard to play D&D, although Rev is doing a good job of making a bard type character where there isn't a bard class in the book.

[Edit: I can see complaint at the removal of any of the 4 core classes, but fighter, wizard, cleric, and rogue are still there.]

And I don't see how there is very little choice, cause that "something every level" is either a feat (extensive list of feats) or a class power chosen off a list of 3-5 (most of the time 4) different powers, with the option at certain levels to trade in old powers for new ones. At 11th level you get to choose a paragon path (read prestige class) that gives you unique powers while you are still getting class features. then at 21st level you get to choose an epic destiny that acts like an epic prestige class that is not necessarily class specific.

There were certain classes that had much fewer choices than that in 3rd (monk and paladin come to mind). 3rd edition had mixed complexity where a fighter or wizard had many more choices to make than a monk, or barbarian. 4th has an even complexity where all the classes have the same amount of choices. Fighters have as many combat maneuvers as wizards have spells, and as clerics have prayers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gaf The Horse With Tears Newbie

Gaf The Horse With Tears

Posted
Posted

I'm still sticking with 2nd Edition.

From what I have seen looking at books... they have over complicated everything. 3rd edition was far more complexe than it should have been... and 4th seems to just add to the complexity.

I miss the days of a simple hit chart...

when all you really needed to play was some dice, a pencil, some paper and friends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timata Newbie

Timata

Posted
Posted

I have not played the new version yet, but I am not so sure about it.....

It seems they changed it for lazy people and chicks.....(we all know the kind of chicks I'm talking about)

How is it now for lazy people? I'm just curious as to what aspect would be lazy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
headlessgoth Newbie

headlessgoth

Posted
Posted

If someone could educate me properly i will give it a try. My first experience with this game was kinda freaky. i took 3 hits of paper acid this was in the 90's when it was available. I went to my freinds house and he took me to the library. He said he wqanted to meet a girl there. We walked in the library and he said "back here dude". By then i was peaking i opened this door and there was this large room full of people. They were all dressed like the d&d characters and talking like them. I guess in that present state of mind i couldnt take it. So i left that room and sat down in the middle of an art exhibit. Then 3 hours later my friend came and got me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timata Newbie

Timata

Posted
Posted

If someone could educate me properly i will give it a try. My first experience with this game was kinda freaky. i took 3 hits of paper acid this was in the 90's when it was available. I went to my freinds house and he took me to the library. He said he wqanted to meet a girl there. We walked in the library and he said "back here dude". By then i was peaking i opened this door and there was this large room full of people. They were all dressed like the d&d characters and talking like them. I guess in that present state of mind i couldnt take it. So i left that room and sat down in the middle of an art exhibit. Then 3 hours later my friend came and got me.

I don't think I'd recommend trying D&D on acid, with people you don't know. As far as dressing like their characters it sounds like a larp (live action role playing) but i don't see how you could larp at a library. I wouldn't recommend Larping either, but maybe that's just because I've been invited to larps and the people that invited me had at least 3 visible bruises or were missing teeth.

Anyway, D&D is a game played with a 4-5 friends typically. You create your character that you control in the game world. The DM (dungeon master) controls pretty much everything else from monsters to shopkeepers and anything else that isn't a character. It's all about fun collective storytelling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Troy Spiral Contributor

Troy Spiral (13)

Posted
Posted

Usually DMing is what I have the most fun with, with a smallish group (maybe 4 players max) that actually know the rules (at least the player guide rules) and the background info and aren't like just someones girlfriend that shows up to sit around and make random wisecracks and generally slow down and screw up the gaming session and/or browbeat their BF into leaving early due to [insert excuse here] . Oops did i just rant about something? Whoa.

I've been leafing through the new rules, i really like the simplification of the rules and the "this monster is for THIS purpose" type stuff. Before I thought the monster abilities and such almost seemed random at times, not really suited to any particular clear-cut use or to counter any particular classes abilities.

I'm still hardcore into MTG (and that wont change I don't think) it takes a LOT of mental energy/time if trying to get skilled at it. But i've been giving very hard consideration to first, playing 4th edition with an existing group for a bit and then 2. starting my own group and DMing it as a "secondary" game of my geek-gaming. Where I'm going to get the time/energy/health from I'm not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Forum Statistics

    38.8k
    Total Topics
    819.8k
    Total Posts

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 19 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept