Agreed

DaringCommander11 · Post by **DaringCommander11** » Wed Apr 10, 2002 12:30 pm

It seems to me that most people that are against 3E over 2E is because 2E came first. Some have never even played third 3E.

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Wed Apr 10, 2002 12:52 pm

I appears that you are right... Fortunately most people don't think that way! If they did then we would all be playing games on the old Comodore Vic20 with 8 color graphics and 128k of memory! We also would not even be playing 2E D&D but the old Basic rules! Hell, lets just do that! Then a Fighter/Mage would be an "Elf" and that would be the only "multi-class" that there was. The rules would be real simple then!

Progress is good, Learn to adapt!

DaringCommander11 · Post by **DaringCommander11** » Thu Apr 11, 2002 11:16 am

When I said that I ment that I was in FAVOR of third edition over second edition and was just pointing out why I think most 2e buffs favor it.

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Thu Apr 11, 2002 1:18 pm

I have never heard of a "Rules Buff". I have heard of a fantasy buff and also a D&D buff. I don't think the rules really matter...

DaringCommander11 · Post by **DaringCommander11** » Fri Apr 12, 2002 11:53 am

They exist

Some of my closest friends would prefere to stick with 2E over 3E just because it came first and it's what they learned on. Almost like a rules loyalist.

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Fri Apr 12, 2002 12:18 pm

All I can say is this then:

The 3E rules allow so much more versatility, ease of use and clarity that not to try them out would be a crime. The 2E rules have too much stuff to wade through that is conflicted and nonsensical. A DM has to spend hours just to decide what not to use.

I probably shouldn't vent this to you but you seem to listen.

In BG2 (I hope you have played) BIS used a hybrid 2E/3E system. It obviously favored 2E but the 3E elements were unmistakeable. Resistances come to mind. They only exist in 3E. Some of the character races also only exist in 3E, like the Tiefling. It was not overly obvious but it was there. If your players are resistant to using 3E, just let them know that they already have started.

Kayless · Post by **Kayless** » Fri Apr 12, 2002 4:45 pm

There’s nothing sadder than people who won’t even give something new a shot. I can understand AD&D loyalists who prefer the old rules, but not people who simply go with them because they came first. And the fact that 3E is sooo much smoother than AD&D just makes it all the more tragic. Change is good!

DraySkullan · Post by **DraySkullan** » Sat Apr 13, 2002 9:05 am

Don't confuse skepticism with an old fogey unwilling to change for any reason. I think you'll find the people who are hesitant over 3rd Edition are not simply old hermits who pull their pants up to their armpits and watch Matlock, but instead have played alot of RPG's and have seen way too many good, playable systems ruined in attempts to make them smoother, more sensible, more realistic etc. (and the fact that it conveniently involved a new set of books that every gamer must buy, therefore increasing the profit margin.... how convenient). Anyway, I've played way too many games to be considered unwilling to change.

Sailor Saturn · Post by **Sailor Saturn** » Sat Apr 13, 2002 11:28 am

Originally posted by DraySkullan
I think you'll find the people who are hesitant over 3rd Edition are not simply old hermits who pull their pants up to their armpits and watch Matlock

True. Some of them are teenage college girls who wear miniskirts and watch Matlock.

I was hesitant with 3e because of playing BG, BG2, and IWD. The main thing I was hesitant about, though, was the new style of multiclassing; but after reading about it in the PH, I've decided I like it more than the 2e multi-/dual-classing.

Kayless · Post by **Kayless** » Sat Apr 13, 2002 4:23 pm

@DraySkullan, Take it from someone who's also played a lot of PnP RPGs: 3E blows AD&D's candy ass right out of the water. It is soooooooooo much better it's not even funny. No system is perfect, 3E included, but nevertheless there's no contest between the two. Trust me, it's not even close.

DaringCommander11 · Post by **DaringCommander11** » Sun Apr 14, 2002 3:05 am

The main concern is a friend of mine that started out on Second Edition and isn't taking very well to Third Edition. It is as if he perfectly adapted to the jumbled rules of AD&D that he has a hard time with an obviously smother system.

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Sun Apr 14, 2002 4:22 pm

I have not even played the 3E rules and I can see the difference. It is definitely better in my opinion... Also, for those who think that BG2 is 2E, think again! They use 3E character classes (Barbarian/Monk). They use Half Orcs, and most of all, the resistance system is from 3E. It is a hybrid system!

Kayless · Post by **Kayless** » Sun Apr 14, 2002 7:41 pm

Absolutely. The people who are leery of 3e should realize that they’ve already been exposed to it through the BG games! Not only is 3e quick and easy to learn, but they've already been through a tutorial of sorts.

Demis · Post by **Demis** » Mon Apr 15, 2002 3:58 am

Originally posted by The Stranger
I have not even played the 3E rules and I can see the difference. It is definitely better in my opinion... Also, for those who think that BG2 is 2E, think again! They use 3E character classes (Barbarian/Monk). They use Half Orcs, and most of all, the resistance system is from 3E. It is a hybrid system!

Actually BG2 used some elements from 3e but nothing too big, they did that only to add to the fun of the game or to add something new. 3e is a lot different and non of the major changes was included in BG2. BG2 is mainly 2e but i guess you can call it a hybrid(slightly?)

DraySkullan · Post by **DraySkullan** » Mon Apr 15, 2002 8:08 am

Actually the monk and the barbarian predate even 2nd edition. They were in the 1st edition of AD&D. The monk I think was in the Players Handbook, and the Barbarian was in the Unearthed Arcana, along with two of my other favorites, the Acrobat and the unequalled Cavalier.

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Mon Apr 15, 2002 8:21 am

The Acrobat, Barbarian, Cavalier and Monk were all removed from the 2E rules because they were seen as overpowered. I personally loved the Acrobat add-on to the thief, but TSR didn't seem as thrilled as I was. Anyways, the characters didn't exist in 2E at all.