It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Dungeons and Dragons - help appreciated(25 posts)(25 posts)
(25 posts)
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Posted December 31, 2011
avatar
wodmarach: I still consider AD&D second edition the last true D&D
avatar
Tormentfan: This.

3rd Ed was the death of D&D for me , It seemed to just devolve into a powergamers system, I couldn't get attached to any of my characters after 2nd.

Pretty much all of the tabletop systems changed to d20 systems after that, if they weren't before, biggest tragedy was MERP going too, oh for the days of a good game of Rolemaster or Call of Chthulu.
I would kill for a gaming group near me I could play CoC with I miss watching my sanity vanish....
Posted December 31, 2011
avatar
Tormentfan: Pretty much all of the tabletop systems changed to d20 systems after that, if they weren't before, biggest tragedy was MERP going too, oh for the days of a good game of Rolemaster or Call of Chthulu.
I don't know anything about Rolemaster, but the d20 version of Call of Cthulhu got very minimal support, while the BRP version is still going strong. And there's tons of non-d20 games out there.
Posted January 01, 2012
Thank you, everyone. You've helped me a lot.
Posted January 01, 2012
avatar
wodmarach: I still consider AD&D second edition the last true D&D
avatar
Tormentfan: This.

3rd Ed was the death of D&D for me , It seemed to just devolve into a powergamers system, I couldn't get attached to any of my characters after 2nd.
I found my experience is the exact opposite. 2nd Edition was the worst system I've ever played for Roleplaying, it had rules that were convoluted and got in the way, THAC0 was not needed and bogged down the game and Saving throws would often be a guessing game. There were also pointless restrictions that limited roleplaying opportunities. Wanna play a Dwarven Wizard outcassed for going against the dwarven grain, you can't, you just can't, it's against the rules. 3rd edition had problems but the rules made more sense and the skill system allowed characters to be more 3 dimensional instead of just the fighter, theif, ect...

I'm still not sure if 4th edition is that great, the way the powers and spells work are a bit MMOish but still it seems better than 2nd edition since the rules don't constantly get in the way by being cryptic.
Posted January 01, 2012
avatar
roninnogitsune: Wanna play a Dwarven Wizard outcassed for going against the dwarven grain, you can't, you just can't, it's against the rules.
No thats having a bad GM... seriously bad GM...
Posted January 01, 2012
avatar
roninnogitsune: Wanna play a Dwarven Wizard outcassed for going against the dwarven grain, you can't, you just can't, it's against the rules.
avatar
wodmarach: No thats having a bad GM... seriously bad GM...
agreed, but there are stupid restrictions like that in AD&D. Gnomes are only allowed to be the illusionist subclass of mages and are denied to be a general mage or any other subclass. Dwarves can only only be fighters, thieves or clerics and a multiclass of the groups for rangers, mages and paladins (even though it's a class that makes sense for the dwarves) are denied to them by the rules. You can House rule it out but I've had many GMs that wouldn't allow it because they don't want a special case for it could be a slippery slope to someone wanting to play a Beholder Psion.
Posted January 01, 2012
avatar
Smannesman: It gets a bit weird because of the D&D Essentials line and the 'Red Box' though.
avatar
orcishgamer: D&D Essentials is a money grab with very low quality bindings and paper on the books. There is also nothing new (or very little new, at best) in them. Take a pass on these low quality books, no reason to encourage this poor behavior.

The Red Box is a fun way to introduce new players and is pretty cheap, but is in no way necessary.
I've got to second this. I got suckered into the Essentials line when I got into roleplaying in 2010 and I've regretted it. Low on options, weak on formatting, and cheap as all heck in construction.

I can't vouch for the core rulebooks (I got out of D&D after that experience and moved on to Pathfinder and other games) but I'd definitely buy them before the Essentials.
Posted January 01, 2012
Try the Dragon Age RPG. It's very well-written, comes with a few adventures in the core box, and has modern rules slickness while having some of the classic feel (without clunkiness). Overall, though: It was written precisely to be a "gateway" RPG to bring people in to P&P games.

While D&D4e can fill that role to some degree, it's built more to move product: books, card sets, randomized cards, miniatures, and so on. It's very intimidating to people who will see that and think, "My god, I have to buy all that?" Dragon Age is sold in small boxed sets similar to Basic D&D was, a rulebook for low levels, and if you like it and want to move on, other boxes to progress that way.
Post edited January 01, 2012 by mqstout
Posted January 01, 2012
avatar
roninnogitsune: I found my experience is the exact opposite. 2nd Edition was the worst system I've ever played for Roleplaying, it had rules that were convoluted and got in the way, THAC0 was not needed and bogged down the game and Saving throws would often be a guessing game. There were also pointless restrictions that limited roleplaying opportunities. Wanna play a Dwarven Wizard outcassed for going against the dwarven grain, you can't, you just can't, it's against the rules. 3rd edition had problems but the rules made more sense and the skill system allowed characters to be more 3 dimensional instead of just the fighter, theif, ect...

I'm still not sure if 4th edition is that great, the way the powers and spells work are a bit MMOish but still it seems better than 2nd edition since the rules don't constantly get in the way by being cryptic.
3rd Edition was actually far more complicated (and needlessly so) than 2nd, but much much better-presented. They both used a perfectly identical equation for calculating hits, but 2nd edition explained it in terms of THAC0, which is very unintuitive (older editions hid the calculations entirely behind a printed table; it took until 3rd Ed before they figured out how to present a simple equation in a simple way). Most of the time you use the PHB only for looking up spells, but only in 3rd Ed were the spells in alphabetical order. Things like that made all the difference.
Posted January 01, 2012
avatar
orcishgamer: D&D Essentials is a money grab with very low quality bindings and paper on the books. There is also nothing new (or very little new, at best) in them. Take a pass on these low quality books, no reason to encourage this poor behavior.

The Red Box is a fun way to introduce new players and is pretty cheap, but is in no way necessary.
avatar
Steely_Gaze: I've got to second this. I got suckered into the Essentials line when I got into roleplaying in 2010 and I've regretted it. Low on options, weak on formatting, and cheap as all heck in construction.

I can't vouch for the core rulebooks (I got out of D&D after that experience and moved on to Pathfinder and other games) but I'd definitely buy them before the Essentials.
The core books are better on all counts: binding, paper, and printing. The information is laid out in a more accessible manner (Essentials seems to have been printed for your table's rules lawyer, and seriously, fuck that guy). They aren't even really more expensive. Buy the core books, imo.
avatar
KillingMachine: If you're getting into 4th Edition D&D, you should skip the Player's Handbook, Monster Manual and Dungeon Master's Guide. They've all been more or less replaced/updated with the essentials line of products. I'd also recommend skipping the Red Box "starter set" unless you are totally new to RPGs and need some extra hand holding. These are the things from the essentials line that I'd suggest:

Dungeon Masters Kit ( replaces the DM's Guide)
Monster Vault ( replaces the Monster Manual)
Heroes of the Fallen Lands and/or Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms ( these replace the Players Handbook)
Rules Compendium ( not totally necessary if you have the DM's Kit, but handy to have for table reference and good for players to have)
avatar
maxman43: I agree with this advice.
I cannot express how much I disagree, Essentials is poor quality (see my other posts in this thread) and the information layout is more likely than not going to actually turn off new players.
avatar
Barefoot_Monkey: 3rd Edition was actually far more complicated (and needlessly so) than 2nd, but much much better-presented. They both used a perfectly identical equation for calculating hits, but 2nd edition explained it in terms of THAC0, which is very unintuitive (older editions hid the calculations entirely behind a printed table; it took until 3rd Ed before they figured out how to present a simple equation in a simple way). Most of the time you use the PHB only for looking up spells, but only in 3rd Ed were the spells in alphabetical order. Things like that made all the difference.
I think you'd find 4th ed is much more streamlined than even that (if you must have your 3.5 type rules I guess you could do Pathfinder, it's a single book to be a player so your investment is tiny comparatively).

You can finish a fight in 4th ed AND still have time to roleplay in a single 4-8 hour session:)
Post edited January 01, 2012 by orcishgamer
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Dungeons and Dragons - help appreciated(25 posts)(25 posts)
(25 posts)