new kits

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Fri Apr 05, 2002 3:27 pm

It's not that THAC0 is hard, it's just that this makes more sense. I still love the 2E rules, I have been playing them for years! I am just happy to see a sensible progression in the hobby I have maintained since I was 11 years old! I am thrilled that it still exists and that there are people who show interest in it! I just wish there were more P&P players in my area so I could get into an old fashioned game. I kind of miss that.

DraySkullan · Post by **DraySkullan** » Fri Apr 05, 2002 4:31 pm

I don't really care if a system makes more sense, or is more realistic if the gameplay suffers. When you take a classic game and start messing with something that wasnt broke in the first place, you lose the fun of the game. One of the most realistic and sensible combats systems I've ever seen was for the Middle Earth RPG. The problem was that each combat round took 20-30 mins because it was so freakin complicated. But it made sooo much sense realistically. I just dont think there was a need to mess with the system. Maybe it wasnt the most real to life system ever, but it worked smoothly and was fun.

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Mon Apr 08, 2002 8:38 am

I haven't played MERP but I have heard about it. I don't know if you can really compare the d20 system to that. As for saying that there was nothing wrong with D&D's original system, I would have to disagree. There was no opportunity for your character to raise statistics, and that is impossible and foolish. With experience and practice your stats should go up, not be stationary. Another way to prove my point, in BG2 they put Armor Classes down to -30 or something by the time you got to Throne of Bhaal. This is a true cheat by the rules of the book, -10 is the lowest AC possible. The fact that they couldn't implement it is proof enough that it was unbalanced and impractical. The original rules do not translate well into a CRPG format. There are glaring holes in the rules that make it impossible.

After all that ranting however, I do agree that the original system for D&D was one of the best and still is! I love it! I support it! Most of all I would die to defend your right to use it! I think perhaps though, you should attempt to be more open to change.

The best example I can think of to compare your thinking to is that there was nothing wrong with the Pentium I processor, why did they go and create the Pentium II?

DraySkullan · Post by **DraySkullan** » Mon Apr 08, 2002 1:22 pm

Well I never said it was a perfect system, I just said it was good enough. I'm all for progress, but just make sure you actually make it better and not screw it up for to sake of making it "more realistic". Same reason I cant stand video games with great graphics that absolutely suck to play. The fun factor is the important thing to me. Now as far as increasing your stats... I personally dont think it's that big a deal. I think you should be able to in some way, but it defititely should be very hard to do, ever. Think about it. You can lift weights all you want, but a person can only become so strong. You really can NEVER increase your base intelligence realistically. You should not be able to bump one stat up every level, and there should be a limit to how many times you can bump each stat up, and/or a limit to what they can be increased to. In the old system, there were ways to increase your stats, but they were rare and they should be. It should take a magical item, or wishes (I think it was 10 wish spells per point above 16 or something like that). And the DM could put stuff in the campaign anytime he felt like it, such as a magic spring or something. Heck, one of the things I loved about the original cavalier class, was that he could increase his Str, Dex, and Con, albeit slowly. As far as AC goes, I may be wrong but I always thought the -10 limit was a popular misconception. The THAC0 chart only went up to -10, but I dont remember reading that that was the best AC you could have. Like I said, I could be wrong though.

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Mon Apr 08, 2002 1:42 pm

You may be right with the THAC0 table, but I am almost sure the max AC was -10. In any event it is nice that there is someone who I can have a sensible argument with!

I am always willing to give a new system a shot. I think that we could consider this the new house rules that the DM has instituted. We don't have to like them, but then we don't have to play either!

Here is a new kit for ya!: A Sorcerer/Bard "Spell Singer" I seem to remember an NPC class called a Spellsinger in one of the "Best of Dragon" issues. It might have been in something else though.

How about this kit?: A Ranger/Thief "Bandit"

DraySkullan · Post by **DraySkullan** » Tue Apr 09, 2002 8:05 am

I think my main beef is that I dont play the PnP enough anymore to buy a new set of books and learn a whole new system, lol. I think I can deal with it on a computer game.

Onyx · Post by **Onyx** » Wed Apr 10, 2002 1:06 am

Originally posted by DraySkullan
I think my main beef is that I dont play the PnP enough anymore to buy a new set of books and learn a whole new system, lol. I think I can deal with it on a computer game.

Come'on, just go and buy the players handbook, that's all you need.

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Wed Apr 10, 2002 9:41 am

Books Shmooks! I went out and bought the books, and it was nothing that I couldn't have figured out by looking at the screen for a while! Believe me, I am no rocket scientist!

You seem quite intelligent, I don't see how you will have any problem absorbing these new rules.

Onyx · Post by **Onyx** » Wed Apr 10, 2002 9:54 am

you never know.
maybe he'll start playing pnp again

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Wed Apr 10, 2002 10:02 am

Worse things have happened...

DraySkullan · Post by **DraySkullan** » Wed Apr 10, 2002 12:25 pm

It's not the difficulty of learning, it's the money more than anything, and I didnt quit playing because of the new edition, i just didnt have time to play much anymore. So I'm sure I could learn the system w/o a prob, it's just that I dont play enough anymore to justify the expense. I can always borrow books >

)

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Thu Apr 11, 2002 2:46 pm

Here is another class combo: Bard/Paladin "The Courtisan"

skilled in the ways of poetry and song to woo the ladies, the courtisan would also need to be capable in the ways of piety and combat in order to attain the vestments of knighthood.

How's that?

DraySkullan · Post by **DraySkullan** » Sat Apr 13, 2002 8:55 am

I dunno about that one. If I was the DM, I would have problems with that. I'm not saying a paladin cant be friendly with the ladies (in a wholesome manner), but I very much doubt a paladin would spend his time writing love songs and poetry to 'woo' them. Not in my campaign anyway.

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Sun Apr 14, 2002 4:29 pm

These arts were considered essential in court life during the Middle ages. Also a Samurai, which is similar to a Paladin these were necessary skills, required to maintain thier honor. Who says that a paladin can't be a courtier? They are similar if not the same as a knight. But that is just me!

DraySkullan · Post by **DraySkullan** » Mon Apr 15, 2002 8:04 am

I'm not saying a paladin cannot be courteous, cultured, and artistic, I'm saying a paladin would not sit around and think of ways to get women. The main difference between a paladin and the classic knight (although a paladin surely can be a knight) is the level of religion. It just reminds me of a bishop hanging out at a singles bar (insert your own joke here).

The Stranger · Post by **The Stranger** » Mon Apr 15, 2002 8:22 am

Obviously you haven't been keeping up on current events...

Izgoth · Post by **Izgoth** » Tue Apr 16, 2002 1:42 pm

I'm not sure if I completely understood this but in 3e you will allways hit if your attack eh....skill is higher than the enemy AC correct?

IMO that's stupid, what's the point with leather armor anymore? If you can't wear plates you propably won't keep up with the enemy attack skill at all.

Onyx · Post by **Onyx** » Wed Apr 17, 2002 1:37 am

Yo, steady now, it's not THAT easy.
Your attack role has to by higher than the AC.
And some AC's can go VERY high.