This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Author Topic: What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?  (Read 36634 times)

Votan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • V
  • Posts: 638
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #30 on: September 30, 2013, 07:43:42 PM »
Quote from: gamerGoyf;695533
Stop being an idiot, you know damn well LWQW was a thing long before 3e. High level Magic-Users we're always supposed to be overly awesome, that was your reward for playing a Magic-User through the low levels where they sucked.


There are differences of degree.  I saw 3E as doing two things with spell casters.  One, they implemented a series of small fixes, any one of which was sufficient to solve an underlying issues.  Two, they made casters viable and balanced from levels one to ten.  

This had unintended effects at high levels.  

With a level cap of six to ten, most of these design issues vanish.  

In some ways this was good -- low power now for great power later only worked with a narrow set of assumptions.

gamerGoyf

  • Creature - Lhurgoyf
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #31 on: September 30, 2013, 07:52:53 PM »
Quote from: Votan;695538
This had unintended effects at high levels.


That shouldn't be a surprise.

Levels 11+ have never worked in any edition because noone can agree on what they're supposed to look like in the first place.

Bloody Stupid Johnson

  • Senior Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3366
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #32 on: September 30, 2013, 08:23:27 PM »
3E doesn't seem really geared for low level 1E dungeon hobo stuff, but I don't care for that especially anyway. I miss the RP-supporting "basketweaving" stuff from 2E mainly i.e. NWPs and kits. 3E has its Craft/Perform/Profession skills, but the way they fight for skill points you could be spending on Spot and Use Magic Device is unfortunate.

Obeeron

  • Dwarven God of Beer
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • O
  • Posts: 108
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #33 on: September 30, 2013, 08:36:02 PM »
Quote from: gamerGoyf;695533
Stop being an idiot, you know damn well LWQW was a thing long before 3e. High level Magic-Users we're always supposed to be overly awesome, that was your reward for playing a Magic-User through the low levels where they sucked.

That shows your profound lack of understanding of pre-3E games.  LFQW did not exist except in 3E.

crkrueger

  • Hulk in the Vineyard
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12559
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #34 on: September 30, 2013, 08:39:37 PM »
Quote from: gamerGoyf;695533
Stop being an idiot, you know damn well LWQW was a thing long before 3e.

Oddly enough, removing nearly every single impediment to a spell-casting class did indeed ramp the class's power up to unheard of levels.

So no, LFQW wasn't even remotely a thing in TSR-era D&D.  If mages were curbstomping your campaign, it was because you chose to basically do what WoTC did and remove all the power and casting restrictions.
Even the the "cutting edge" storygamers for all their talk of narrative, plot, and drama are fucking obsessed with the god damned rules they use. - Estar

Yes, Sean Connery's thumb does indeed do megadamage. - Spinachcat

Isuldur is a badass because he stopped Sauron with a broken sword, but Iluvatar is the badass because he stopped Sauron with a hobbit. -Malleus Arianorum

"Tangency Edition" D&D would have no classes or races, but 17 genders to choose from. -TristramEvans

gamerGoyf

  • Creature - Lhurgoyf
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #35 on: September 30, 2013, 08:52:14 PM »
Quote from: CRKrueger;695551
So no, LFQW wasn't even remotely a thing in TSR-era D&D.

Except for the part where they explicitly say that magic-users are weak at low levels to counterbalance them being powerful a high levels. Newsflash that's the definition of LFQW.

RandallS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #36 on: September 30, 2013, 09:17:00 PM »
Quote from: gamerGoyf;695554
Except for the part where they explicitly say that magic-users are weak at low levels to counterbalance them being powerful a high levels. Newsflash that's the definition of LFQW.


In theory high level MUs were the most powerful characters in the game in TSR D&D. in fact, it depended on their spell selection: if they did not have the good spells, they were less powerful -- and unlike WOTC D&D they were limited to what spells they found or researched in the game.  However, they were not overwhelmingly more powerful than other classes. High level fighters could regularly take out high level mages because Fighters had great saving throws (saving throws depended only on the class and level of the target in TSR D&D, the class could be 1st level or 20th and the save vs his spells was the same) and high hit points.

A single high level fighter could often take down a high level mage in combat, two or three almost always would be able to take out the mage. They could just wade up to the mage and start whacking at him trusting to their saves and hit points to get them there.  If they have some support (say archers attacking the MU so he can't get spells off -- no "concentration" rolls to save spells when hit), it became even easier. And once they start whacking, the MU isn't likely to get many spells off.
Randall
Rules Light RPGs: Home of Microlite20 and Other Rules-Lite Tabletop RPGs

Opaopajr

  • SeƱor Wences
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7768
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #37 on: September 30, 2013, 09:17:10 PM »
Quote from: One Horse Town;695536
The players.


I was going to say 'the fun' but this hits closer to the core. :p
Just make your fuckin' guy and roll the dice, you pricks. Focus on what's interesting, not what gives you the biggest randomly generated virtual penis.  -- J Arcane
 
You know, people keep comparing non-TSR D&D to deck-building in Magic: the Gathering. But maybe it's more like Katamari Damacy. You keep sticking shit on your characters until they are big enough to be a star.
-- talysman

Obeeron

  • Dwarven God of Beer
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • O
  • Posts: 108
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #38 on: September 30, 2013, 09:22:08 PM »
Quote from: Kiero;695535
Evidently the designers of Next consider those whiners more important than anyone else, thus aren't really doing much to deal with that fundamental flaw in 3.x.

Sounds like you've been reading too much of that other forum ;)  The Next team (aka most of the people that created 4E) are well aware of maintaining class balance, just not on such absolute, gridded combat terms as 4E.

crkrueger

  • Hulk in the Vineyard
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12559
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #39 on: September 30, 2013, 09:40:24 PM »
Quote from: gamerGoyf;695554
Except for the part where they explicitly say that magic-users are weak at low levels to counterbalance them being powerful a high levels. Newsflash that's the definition of LFQW.

You read the talking points at the Den like a good little 3tard, now to listen to your betters like RandallS and find out how the game actually worked.
Even the the "cutting edge" storygamers for all their talk of narrative, plot, and drama are fucking obsessed with the god damned rules they use. - Estar

Yes, Sean Connery's thumb does indeed do megadamage. - Spinachcat

Isuldur is a badass because he stopped Sauron with a broken sword, but Iluvatar is the badass because he stopped Sauron with a hobbit. -Malleus Arianorum

"Tangency Edition" D&D would have no classes or races, but 17 genders to choose from. -TristramEvans

gamerGoyf

  • Creature - Lhurgoyf
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #40 on: September 30, 2013, 09:41:44 PM »
Quote from: RandallS;695562
A single high level fighter could often take down a high level mage in combat, two or three almost always would be able to take out the mage. They could just wade up to the mage and start whacking at him trusting to their saves and hit points to get them there.  If they have some support (say archers attacking the MU so he can't get spells off -- no "concentration" rolls to save spells when hit), it became even easier. And once they start whacking, the MU isn't likely to get many spells off.


Only if this is some kind of contrived arena scenario and the wizard forgot his genius brain at home. The arena is the fighters best case. The worst case involves getting sealed inside a dungeon room forever by the wizards Stoneshape spell or charging at the wizard only to realize too late that it was only an illusion, the floor was also an illusion and now he's falling to his death.

crkrueger

  • Hulk in the Vineyard
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12559
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #41 on: September 30, 2013, 09:45:10 PM »
Quote from: gamerGoyf;695573
Only if this is some kind of contrived arena scenario and the wizard forgot his genius brain at home. The arena is the fighters best case. The worst case involves getting sealed inside a dungeon room forever by the wizards Stoneshape spell or charging at the wizard only to realize too late that it was only an illusion, the floor was also an illusion and now he's falling to his death.

The sad part is, you actually don't realize you just created a magical arena with prepared illusions and traps, etc...  The second you start saying "but the wizard could do..." you're creating an arena custom-built to your own bias.

In actual play, things were much different for 20+ years before WotC took over, and for all those playing the same games, it stayed that way, no LFQW based on Denner White Rooms.
Even the the "cutting edge" storygamers for all their talk of narrative, plot, and drama are fucking obsessed with the god damned rules they use. - Estar

Yes, Sean Connery's thumb does indeed do megadamage. - Spinachcat

Isuldur is a badass because he stopped Sauron with a broken sword, but Iluvatar is the badass because he stopped Sauron with a hobbit. -Malleus Arianorum

"Tangency Edition" D&D would have no classes or races, but 17 genders to choose from. -TristramEvans

gamerGoyf

  • Creature - Lhurgoyf
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #42 on: September 30, 2013, 10:01:29 PM »
Quote from: CRKrueger;695575
In actual play, things were much different for 20+ years before WotC took over, and for all those playing the same games, it stayed that way, no LFQW based on Denner White Rooms.


No you are the one arguing in bad faith.

Randall posted a contrived scenario where the Fighter beats the Wizard. I countered with another contrived scenario where the Wizard beats the Fighter. It's almost like I was saying that contrived scenarios mean jack shit.

Of course responding to you is pointless, because you are arguing in bad faith

Votan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • V
  • Posts: 638
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #43 on: September 30, 2013, 10:08:21 PM »
Quote from: gamerGoyf;695573
Only if this is some kind of contrived arena scenario and the wizard forgot his genius brain at home. The arena is the fighters best case. The worst case involves getting sealed inside a dungeon room forever by the wizards Stoneshape spell or charging at the wizard only to realize too late that it was only an illusion, the floor was also an illusion and now he's falling to his death.


The very tight rules on spell interruption could matter, even here.  Of course, they were never 100% consistent and there were a lot of fiddly bits.  But casting spells was never guaranteed (especially versus an archer . . . ).

Wizards were the most powerful class but they were still vulnerable to surprise at high levels which helped create a solid role for the other classes.  

Justin Alexander (who used to post here) had a very good insight into the balance points of 3E that kind of morphed into E6.  I think it was a pretty well grounded idea, and I admit I prefer playing a wizard who has something useful to do from level one on . . .

crkrueger

  • Hulk in the Vineyard
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12559
What's the most important part of older editions that 3e/4e missed out on?
« Reply #44 on: September 30, 2013, 10:22:24 PM »
Quote from: gamerGoyf;695578
No you are the one arguing in bad faith.

Randall posted a contrived scenario where the Fighter beats the Wizard. I countered with another contrived scenario where the Wizard beats the Fighter. It's almost like I was saying that contrived scenarios mean jack shit.

Of course responding to you is pointless, because you are arguing in bad faith

No, I'm arguing with the experience of multiple AD&D campaigns under my belt, two of which each ran more then a decade of frequent play in which actually using the rules that lent restrictions to wizards ended up having wizards be a feared class, but also fearing fighters, rangers, paladins and thieves who frequently killed such unstoppable powerhouses.

Undoubtedly your reply will be the standard "you must have let them win", or the "mage played stupidly".  You actually have no idea at all, how unbelievably restrictive 1e magic-users were compared to 3e wizards.  As a result, you are arguing with nothing more then a page of talking points you cribbed from places like the Den.

Zero experience, zero facts.  I can't call you arguing in bad faith, as I don't think you're lying, you're just completely ignorant of the subject matter.
Even the the "cutting edge" storygamers for all their talk of narrative, plot, and drama are fucking obsessed with the god damned rules they use. - Estar

Yes, Sean Connery's thumb does indeed do megadamage. - Spinachcat

Isuldur is a badass because he stopped Sauron with a broken sword, but Iluvatar is the badass because he stopped Sauron with a hobbit. -Malleus Arianorum

"Tangency Edition" D&D would have no classes or races, but 17 genders to choose from. -TristramEvans