Quote from: CRKrueger;538034His shit makes Dragonball-Z look like Name of the Rose . . .

:rotfl:

Again, I don't know why anyone replies to that pile of pigshit.

Quote from: jibbajibba;538051um ... TCO is just saying have a more rapid healing model and give everyone rings of jumping and boots of speed and spend 90% of the time in combat.

I think its still D&D.

The more rapid healing model I used was simply to hand out piles of healing potions, making them cheap and easy to buy and having monsters drop them in vast quantities. It was also more like spending 50-60% of our time in combat, not 90% but combat was a lot more violent, as in starting every battle at full HP and taking damage equal to 50-90% of the party's combined HP total each battle. I just gave them the healing to deal with that.

This, as opposed to the more attrition based game described in the rules. I was aiming not only at the cinematic slugfests you see in Anime, but the rate of action in video games, either action or RPG of the 90s. AD&D wasn't a good fit for that as written, but it really didn't take much tweaking to get it there, and there was already a model for it in the SSI Gold Box AD&D games like Curse of the Azure Bonds. Those games were basically endless streams of battles, most of which were more challenging than attrition-based tabletop AD&D. In the Gold Box computer RPGs, they really didn't do attrition since they made resting trivially easy, and whenever HP got low or your Fireballs ran out you could pretty much rest anywhere with little risk. I played those games to death before I ever started playing tabletop D&D, and I knew AD&D could do the sort of game I had in mind with some tweaking.

My 3E experiences were more of a mess, as the game was more of a mess. It wasn't necessarily as drastic as CRKrueger makes it out to be. Lets put it this way:

One of the extremes of 3E is putting godlike absolute power in the hands of PCs. Its a part of the game and written into its DNA, though many people downplay this. The other DMs I gamed with really liked that aspect of 3E, it was their favorite part of the game(and most of them rejected 4E for removing it). They simply took that aspect of the game to the next level, extended it to areas RAW CharOp couldn't take it, and used it to overcome their own and their players' own limitations in system mastery. They wanted the power of batman Wizards and CoDzilla, but didn't have the system mastery to actually do it using the actual rules and wanted to have that sort of power on different character concepts than 3E spellcasters, which often couldn't be done using the actual rules. It sounds crazier than it was in practice, as thematically it really wasn't any crazier than kitchen sink Mos Eisley Cantina style 3E and it wasn't more overpowered than me using "Rules As Written" CharOp bullshit(which is how I played in those campaigns, as those particular houserules left a bad taste in my mouth).

When I ran 3E, I houseruled it attempting to achieve a game that looked like 4E(and never really succeeded to be honest). Tone down the overpowered magic, make nonspellcasters more effective and less mundane, and ramp up the action like I did with 2E.

Quote from: 1989;537919Cinematic anime 2e.

Loser.

Mods, please change my name to Cinematic Anime 2e.  TCO, even though you're trolling harder than ever, I want to know what you would change in 4e to make it more like your gay sex version of d20?

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;538108The more rapid healing model I used was simply to hand out piles of healing potions, making them cheap and easy to buy and having monsters drop them in vast quantities. It was also more like spending 50-60% of our time in combat, not 90% but combat was a lot more violent, as in starting every battle at full HP and taking damage equal to 50-90% of the party's combined HP total each battle. I just gave them the healing to deal with that.

Then your combats were more violent, but less meaningful; success only matters if you could have failed.

Frankly, I think you should have just dropped even the pretence of using rule systems and played entirely freeform. It's obviously what you wanted your sessions to play like; the rules systems were getting in your way. But no, you had to have the precious initials "D&D" on your character sheets.

Quote from: B.T.;538119Mods, please change my name to Cinematic Anime 2e.  TCO, even though you're trolling harder than ever, I want to know what you would change in 4e to make it more like your gay sex version of d20?

I don't want to name drop, but I did hear that TCO was lead author for The Book Of Pointless Dorkiness.

Quote from: B.T.;538119Mods, please change my name to Cinematic Anime 2e.  TCO, even though you're trolling harder than ever, I want to know what you would change in 4e to make it more like your gay sex version of d20?

I don't want to name drop, but I did hear that TCO was lead author for The Book Of Pointless Dorkiness.

Why are we feeding the troll?

Quote from: Ladybird;538139Then your combats were more violent, but less meaningful; success only matters if you could have failed.

Success or failure wasn't really the point. It was more "combat as sport" than "combat as war". Also, the 2E generally played in my area really wasn't that lethal to begin with, and that was true before I arrived. It was more story based in the Dragonlance/High Fantasy trilogy style, where DM's fudged die rolls to keep people alive 90% of the time.

This was the mid-nineties, and "Old School" D&D was long dead among the people I gamed with.

Quote from: Ladybird;538139Frankly, I think you should have just dropped even the pretence of using rule systems and played entirely freeform. It's obviously what you wanted your sessions to play like; the rules systems were getting in your way. But no, you had to have the precious initials "D&D" on your character sheets.

It was very freeform, we barely used the game rules at all outside of combat. 2E did freeform very well.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;538152It was very freeform, we barely used the game rules at all outside of combat. 2E did freeform very well.

No. Freeform does freeform very well. It doesn't really matter what you write on your character sheets after that.

Quote from: Marleycat;538144Why are we feeding the troll?

I'm a masochist.

TCO, you going to answer my question or not?  I figure it might induce cognitive dissonance because you would be forced to admit 4e was flawed.

Quote from: B.T.;538154I'm a masochist.

TCO, you going to answer my question or not?  I figure it might induce cognitive dissonance because you would be forced to admit 4e was flawed.

As someone already said, this site really does need a bag of popcorn smiley.

Quote from: B.T.;538119TCO, even though you're trolling harder than ever, I want to know what you would change in 4e to make it more like your gay sex version of d20?

This question?

The answer is simple, and that is to make it faster. 4E is slow. Its not something easy to fix or change however, and something I simply put up with.

Quote from: Marleycat;538144Why are we feeding the troll?

Beats me.  I'm enjoying the non-spectacle of two people on my ignore list arguing with each other.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;537892But 4E converted a large section of the D&D community, and there isn't enough to carry D&D without us either.

Yes, there is..

Quote from: Dog Quixote;538180Beats me.  I'm enjoying the non-spectacle of two people on my ignore list arguing with each other.

I keep forgetting that I do have that feature. For some reason I have rarely used it in any forum I have been on. Not even TBP.:eek:

Quote from: Marleycat;538192I keep forgetting that I do have that feature. For some reason I have rarely used it in any forum I have been on. Not even TBP.:eek:

Here it is really useful. You should try it.