Brave | Disney/Pixar

Brave | Disney/Pixar

Looks like a great fun movie!! Can't wait!

What I miss about 3rd Ed: Part IV

It is the job of the DM to make as an enjoyable gaming session as possible for his or her players. This includes, but is not limited to, creating a secondary world, as Tolkien would put it, righting interesting story lines, and creating encounters that are fun and challenging to the PC’s. To do all of these things well the DM must at hand a system that is will constructed with well defined, as well as flexible. 4th ED has a well constructed and defined system, what it lacks in flexibility. 

This lack of flexibility is not limited to the creation of combat encounters, it permeates the whole system. Wizards of the Coast has created a system that is so structured and regimented that there is little the DM can do to change anything without running the risk of breaking something. The DM, virtually, has to be a professional game designer to makes sense of the rules to do simple things like making a magic item. 

As said the lack of flexibility is not limited to combat, or magic items. It has found its way into one of the most important areas of the game, the Player Characters. The character classes have become a straight line of progression. If you want to make the best fighter that there is there are very few options that one has. There are only a certain number of ability, feats, magic items, armor, or weapons that the fighter can take that will make it the best that it can be. The end result is a character that is, but for a few small details, exactly the same as any over fight that is being played all around the world. This holds true for pretty much true for every other character that is in 4th ED.

Of course this is a problem. Players what to build something different. They want to play the fighter the wields a halberd and moves in and out of combat with ease, all while wearing full plate. They want to play the ranger that is as dangerous in melee as while a distance. The wizard that, when all else fails, can pick of the long sword and help hack a path to safety. But none of these things are possible in 4th ED. One is limited to a narrow band of what a class can do. If you want to play something different you have to wait for Wizards to publish a new class (and good luck and building your own).

These lacks in flexibility were never a problem in 3rd ED. Sure 4th ED has filled in some glaring holes, and has simplified some areas, but in doing so if also made a system that come not be molded by a DM and the players at the table into something that everyone wanted and loved. In 3rd ED the DM could look at the rules with easy and pick out those parts that didn’t work well for the campaign, or and in a house rule that would allow the characters to do something that would and flair to the game. 

If a player really wanted to make fighter with a Tumble of 15, it could be done. If the player to play a rogue that sneak attacked with a ballista, it would be highly difficult, and very unlikely, but hey!, if the player could come up with a great reason why it would work, it could be done. The rules in 3rd ED were flexible enough for a DM to find a way. This was true of many other aspects of the game as well.

Magic items were great. Gnome Rogue wants a flying carpet, done. Same Gnome want a monocle of sight, sure why not. Drow Ranger wants to enchant his scabbards so they do more damage against undead, let’s do this. Sometimes things were just silly, or the players can’t come up with a good reason why the great ax should be flaming and grant an attack of opportunity, but hey at least there was room to ask.

I could go on and on about how much more flexible 3rd ED was. But that would no doubt take up more space that anyone what want to read.

So, what do I miss about 3rd ED?: The flexibility to do what I feel is best for my game. The flexibility for the players to make their characters, and thusly the game experience, what they want them to be.

♜

What all that in mind I am very happy to say that after a lot of thought I, and my group, of decided to move back the 3rd ED. This wasn’t an easy choice to make. During the process I asked myself many times if I just wasn’t taking the time to take 4th ED to heart. I thought that if I read more, or wrote more, or played more, that at some point I would come to enjoy it. But that has just not been the case. Rather, the more that I got into it the more I realized that 4th was just dragging me down. I could see it with my players too.

I could see it with every round of combat. The myriad of choice of actions. The complexity of the battle field. In non-combat the lack luster feel of everything that was going on. Something had to change, something was missing.

So after talking with a close gaming friend that missing something was soul. 4th ED has taken away the soul of D&D and replaced it with something else. I’m not sure what that something is, but I’m really glade that, for the time being at least, I don’t have to worry about it.

So till next time, happy gaming. 3rd ED, here we come!!

What I miss about 3rd Ed: Part III

So today I would like to talk about an area that will no doubt be some what touchy. There will no doubt be those that think I'm wrong, or will say that I'm making an issue of nothing. But I have to say that this issue, or at least issue from my point of view, is important. So, you ask, what is this said issue?: it's roleplaying. Not roleplaying in general, but roleplaying, or the lack there of, in 4th ED. 

Now, before anyone says, 'Hey, you! Roleplaying is all up to the DM, and I'd you find it hard in the new rules that's your problem', I want to say that, in part, that is true. It is true that I could implant roleplaying into my campaign wherever I wanted. Yet, in doing so, given the way the new rules work, it makes it very hard to hand out experience.

Now truly a DM could just had out XP at will. Run the roleplaying just as in 3rd ED, but then a problem comes up. Now that I've plugged my roleplaying in, were does it fall in the ten encounter average per level? And do I give out a parcel? Because if I don't they characters will miss one as part of their level advancement. Okay maybe that's not a huge problem, but it seems to me to still be one. Maybe you could treat a gold parcel as reward for completion of a quest, but that's not always a reasonable option. 

3rd ED didn't ask the DM to work this problem out. All a DM had to do was make an interesting NPC, a story or situation, and play it out to the willing players around the table. That was it, simple and clean cut. The only limitation was the DM's imagination. 

Now, though, the DM has a mountain of information to plow through. If a  wishes to make a roleplaying event it has be turned into a skill challenge. When that happens the whole feel of the encounter changes. No longer is it about taking on a character and trying to convince Prince Al'adon to pay for the parties adventure.  Now to do that the player just has to get three successes before five failures and the prince is convinced. 

Assuredly there are players, and DM's,  that will try to add roleplaying into the die rolls, but more often then not the players end up just rolling their dice until they get the required successes. For some players, the ones that never got into the roleplaying part even in 3rd ED, this way of doing things is great. For the players that enjoyed roleplaying, it is not. It's a mystery killer, a story killer. It makes D&D no different them playing WoW; and that is a very sad thing indeed. 

4th ED has taken away the fun and challenge for the roleplaying encounter. It has replaced it with a system, a mechanism that requires no thought. It has taken the feeling out of roleplaying a character and turned it into something bland and boring. 3rd ED allowed all players to play roleplaying encounters how they felt most comfortable. It allowed the thespians to act out with detail and quiet types to roll their dice. 4th ED has taken away that flexibility at the cost of the players. 

So what do I miss about 3rd ED?: True roleplaying and the flexibility to make all players happy in roleplaying encounters. 

Bard

Okay... ha

So... haha

This is just to damn funny! hahahaha

Enjoy! 

Bard!! hehe

What I miss about 3rd Ed: Part II

So I just got done reading an article by Monte Cook on the D&D website (links below). He recently picked up writing this article, and the question he poses is a good one, as well as bring up some issues that I’ve had with 4th ED of D&D. With that in mind maybe this should be part of my “What I miss about 3rd ED” articles?

Anyway, Mr. Cook writes about the state of magic items in 4th ED. He makes the statement that “Magic in the game doesn’t seem, well, magical.”, and I think that he’s right, and the players that have said the same thing.  Magic doesn’t seem magical anymore. It just seems to be something that is a through away, a need of the system, with nothing special about it. At the end of combat the DM hands out a parcel with a magic item attached. And if the players don’t get said item, soon they will be getting their butts handed to them.

There used to be a time when the DM could develop  magic items that meet the needs of each character, while at the same time keeping the mystery of magic in the world, Mr. Cook touches on this as well. A DM could spend a few minutes making up a fun, powerful, yet simple, weapon or magic item that the characters would find very useful. It was a simple process and added a lot to the adventure. 4th ED just doesn’t allow for this kind of originality. This system is so complex that if you change one thing the wrong way the whole thing comes down. 

When it comes to making magic items its even worse. Gone is the simplicity of a +3 weapon with the ability to make a fire ball on a critical hit. No, no. The DM has to work out how it will play with the other abilities that the characters have. Then there’s having to work out if it’s going to be an ‘at will’, ‘encounter’, or daily, and how that will balance, it’s a tiny nightmare. The DM resorts to just telling the players that their characters have found a level 3 magic item of... some... kind...!? What’s the mystery in that? Oh yeah, there is none. Magic items have become as Mr. Cook says in so many words, a mere function of character advancement, and this is said.

I could go on for much long, but there is always plenty of time later. So what do I miss about 3rd ED, the mystery, personal nature, and ease of magic items. 

Mr. Cooks Article here

Campaign "The Green Tide"

So after a short break, well, okay, not so short a break, the game is on again. After AT it took some time to get back into the grove of things, and with everyone else having plans, it took a while to get back to it. But on Monday the dice will be rolling. 

With that in mind I thought I would give a brief overview of what has happened in the last session. I’ll fill in the rest later on.

“After crossing through the deep of forest between Ra’dar, the heroes have reached the Village of Cyjar. 

There the heroes meet with the Mayor, Mr. Pel, of Cyjar and finds out that a farm house about a day way had been attacked and burned down by goblins. Mr. Pel sees this as being a dangerous change in the behavior of the goblins. In the past they would raid, steal goods, kill some live stock, but little more. 

Given that they have been sent to Cyjar to investigate the goblin attacks, they agree to go check out the location of the attack. That night the Mayor puts the heroes up for the night in the local inn, The Shepherds Inn. 

Prior to resting for the night, members of the party go to the local Temple to Greania and see if there is anyway of helping the people that had been reported as being sick.”

“That night, as dawn is nearing, the heroes are awoken to the sounds of cries, and the light of fire issuing forth from their room windows. As they quickly headed down to the inn’s common room they were confronted by a group of goblins.

A battle quickly ensued and much effort was given to beat back the goblins in the inn. Once defeated the heroes took little time to check the bodies, rather they rushed outside to see what aid they could give. 

Once outside they were beset, from the surrounding trees, by a stronger force of goblins. From the trees a goblin mage attacked with effect while three others charged forward and engaged the heroes with bow and blade. The battle was fierce and pressed the heroes to their limits. For a short time hope began to wane. Then when hope was near to breaking the goblin champion fell to a mighty blow and the battle soon swung in the heros favor.

It is here that we now find our heroes, after the battle, and helping the town pick up the pieces.”

What I miss about 3rd ED: Part I

Most of us have within our roleplaying lives have played the 3rd edition of D&D. Most of us loved it, some of us didn’t, but either way we played it. It was, for me, the system that I first DM’ed in and I loved it. The system, regardless of the comments of others, I thought was a simple one that lent itself to the wild imagination of a DM. The rules were firm enough to be a excellent base for any new DM, yet loose enough that they could be molded to any need at hand. Something that I feel 4th Ed is lacking. 

But that is not what I’m  about right now. I could go on for hours about the many rules changes that I think have done more to hamper the game the help. But... as this is part one of what I hope will be a long series, there is plenty of time for that later. 

The point here is to say, that what I miss about 3rd Ed were the monster descriptions. Now I have a pretty damn good imagination, and I can come up with some really amazing descriptions for things even on an off day; thats my job, I’m a DM. I spend quite a bit of time filling all the landscapes of the world with all the detail that I can so my players feel as if though there are right there in the world, not in a basement for a few hours. It takes up a lot of time coming up with all that detail. I love doing it so I’m not complaining, in fact its one of my favorite parts of being a DM. That said, it was so amazing being able to pick the monsters and have colorful entries right there for me to read to my players.

But that’s not so with 4th. Every so often you will get a brief overview of what the critter looks like if it is part of an over arching type, but thats about it. Most of the time you don’t even get that, so the DM is left trying to come up with his/her own description based off of a picture, which are also not as common as I would like, or off of the paragraph that covers the monsters tactics. In both cases I feel a little bit, nay, a whole lot, cheated. 

I have no doubt that the reason for the lack of description is due to the fact that Wizards thinks that everyone has all the D&D mini’s, and with them in hand you no longer have to give a colorful explanation of what the monster looks like. All you have to do is set the mini on the table and say: “There, thats what it looks like.” I same, LAME!!, to that. It totally takes me out of the story. Completely takes me, and I dare say most people, out of the detailed world that I have been building. 

And to Wizards I same “Shame On You!” One reason we play D&D is to be taken to another place. By taking away the little details, like monster descriptions, you take away the depth of the world, as well as make a DM’s job harder. 

So what do I miss about 3rd Ed?: Monster description entries. A little thing, yes, but its the little things that matter.