delightful thread

Hey I just signed up on the site and after readin alot of the posts i was wondering if anyone plays 1st edition anymore?

Well, I know that there are crusty old geezers out there that supposedly still play first edition, though  I have no idea why.  Maybe they simply have an intense sense of nostalgia or perhaps they are simply incapable of adapting to change for good or ill.

---

"If you fudge dice rolls, your system is failing you!" -Sons of Kryos

well then what is the advantages to 3e vs. 1e? Ive only ever played 1e, and heard only bad about 3e.

OMGWTFHTML!

Well, first off, let me just say that both are game systems and work well enough.  There's no reason you can't like 1st edition.  On the other hand, if you've heard anything bad about 3rd edition (now 3.5, of course) it's likely baseless, paranoid, elitist nonsense.

D&D now uses the "d20" system.  Here are some point why 3rd edition is "better". (IMO, of course).

1. It's streamlined, consistent and semi-modular.  What elitists like to call "dumed-down".  Everything is d20 plus a modifier vs. a target number.  Higher is always better.  You don't have to remember if this roll needs high or low or if a lower armor class is better than a higher armor class.  More is always better.  You don't need to consult a complex matrix to determine what your Strength is good for or how many languages you can know.  Each stat gives you a modifier (+1 for every 2 points over 10) that applies to anything that that stat applies to.  Strength 14 give you +2 to hit, +2 damage, +2 to lift a gate and +2 to any Strength-based skills.  Easy and consistent.

2. Options, not limitations.  Why can't a wizard use a sword?  Heck, I know that I can pick up a sword and have a chance, however poor, of hurting something with it.  The idea that a wizard can't use a sword or a cleric can't use an edged weapon "just because" is silly.  There may be consequences to trying, but it's an option.  The wizard has a -4 to hit.  The cleric (if his particular god demands no edged weapons) suffers the appropriate holy condemnation.  But there's nothing magically stopping them from trying.  You can play an elf or a halfling or a half-orc all the way to 20th level and beyond.  There are no arbitrary "level caps" to punish you for not being human.  Players have a wide choice of skills.  Some classes find it harder to advance in some skills, but there's nothing stopping them from trying.  Also, "Feats" allow players to trick out their characters with special abilities and talents, setting them apart from just another "3rd Level Fighter".  There's even a feat that will "train" a wizard to use a sword without penalty.  And you can multi-class with near impunity, none of the weird, racially limited certain combo only stuff from 1st edition...

3. Fantasy.  D&D was never all that great of a simulation of "medieval" life.  So now they've just stopped trying.  While any campaign can be tweaked to be more or less fantastic as the players see fit, the default "mode" of play assumes some decidedly non-historical elements.  The Player's Handbook offers such things as "Repeating Crossbows", "Gnome Hooked Hammers", "Tanglefoot Bags", "Thunderstones" and "Sunrods".  Your DM can say that these things aren't available in his setting, but they are there if he wants to use them.

So, basically, while you don't have to like 3rd edition, it certainly isn't any worse than 1st edition and there is plenty of evidence to suggest that 3rd edition is better.

I can only wonder what "bad" you've heard about the system.  It follows an intelligent design philosophy that many of the big games are starting to emulate, from World of Darkness (ie Vampire) to the newest version of Shadowrun.

While the relative value of the above facts are opinion, they are, indeed, facts.

---

"If you fudge dice rolls, your system is failing you!" -Sons of Kryos

Wow - Can't tell you how much I missed this place. I'm counting one, two, um, maybe 6  posts in four pages that actually answered the thread.  (Don't get me wrong, that's why I love the forum - it's just the mod-from-another-site in me that pukes inwardly. Don't ask me how that works.) I kid. But now *I* digress.

I JUST NOW got back into playing - up until now, it's been all writing and drawing (including a brief stint here spelling the inimitable Art Monkey) and no campaigns for ol' ArtistX.

But now - insert maniacal laugh here - I get to finally play 3.5, and the rule changes rock. And for my first quest back, starting aaaaaaaallllll the way back at level 2, I proudly present - my rogue-cleric gestalt whisper gnome!  I haven't delved far enough in to know if gestalts can happen at Level 2, I don't really care, it's the way the GM wants to run the campaign and *shrug* hey, it's his show.

But I'm picturing a cross between a hobbit, Gollum, and Dr. Claw. There's going to be some weirdo occurrences happening, and I can't wait to get started.

Since I don't have the character sheet in front of me, well, no stats. But I can't wait to get the living snot stomped out of me the first time we run into trouble!

Actually gestalt characters are characters that merge two (or more) classes into one, taking all the good stuff and leaving the bad out, which means that ordinary characters and gestalt characters can't exist side-by-side as player characters.
You play gestalt, you play gestalt from lvl 1 till death. End of discussion.

Oh, and Gollum is a hobbit, so that takes out the hobbit part ;) By the way, who is Dr. Claw?

Thanks for the fill-in. I was used to dual-class, haven't had enough time to read the rulebook to figure out the whole gestalt thing.

And I probably should have said a mix between a hobbit, a severely messed up/corrupted  hobbit and the bad guy from Inspector Gadget.

Color Guy Ry:

...ring of shielding+5...

In what book is this item?

i have to agree with artmonkey new d&d is better, it's much simper and not so confusing. and its good for begginers. the d20 modern though i do not like and i will tell you why. its because its based not in the past in a different realm but the future or now in this world. some like it but i dont.

---

You cant tell me what to do your a dog, you dont have a soul.

omg youre so right, geez why doesnt anybody get that. 2.0 was great..like 8 years ago but 3.0 is so much simpler, not so much rolling so theres time for roll...playing. i love 3.0.

---

You cant tell me what to do your a dog, you dont have a soul.

  I know this thread is oooooolld, but I figured I'd throw my mutant in.

A human fighter with a demonic bloodline.

Name: Dante  >:D

Hmm, I forgot about this thread entirely.  Anyone have new 4th edition weirdness?  Or new 3.5 coolness for that matter?

---

Richard M.
Grimfang
"Whisper"
Xaeraes