D&D!

Discuss everything about books, movies, games, and other art forms/media here.
Message
Author
User avatar
Palantyre
Posts: 984
Joined: 15 Sep 2002 01:28
Location: House of the raisin bun
Contact:

D&D!

#1 Post by Palantyre » 23 Sep 2009 23:15

Yes, what the topic says. The world's leading geek metal band's forum needs a D&D thread. I refuse to believe me and Pathfinder are the only fans here. :P

So, as an opening question to get things going:
What do you people think of the 4th edition if you have already tried it? I personally think it's mostly crap compared to 3.5. It's fun enough as a tactical combat game, but that's it. The variation and freedom for character development has been raped with a rusty shovel. Now I know D&D isn't traditionally the most in-depth Role Playing Experience (tm) like Vampire (supposedly) or whathaveyou, but jeez. 4th edition is to 3.5 basically what gaming consoles are to the PC: simplified at the cost of content and choices, to appeal to the unwashed masses.

Which brings me to my closing note: This is awesome.

P.S. to elitists: Yes, we know you don't like D&D. Now put down the stick and step away from the horse carcass.
And The Lord said unto John: 'Come forth and receive eternal life'.
But John came fifth, and won a toaster.

User avatar
Cerbere
Posts: 1500
Joined: 08 Feb 2009 07:34

Re: D&D!

#2 Post by Cerbere » 24 Sep 2009 00:08

I play D&D. Unfortunately only 4th edition... but I only started playing recently. Maybe I'll pick up 3.5 at a later time.

Led Guardian
Posts: 2427
Joined: 26 Mar 2008 21:08
Location: Somewhere less cliché than far beyond

Re: D&D!

#3 Post by Led Guardian » 24 Sep 2009 02:00

I haven't played for years, but I played 3.5. I suppose I can't judge 4.0 since I've never tried it, but I think it's bullshit anyway. :mrgreen: Besides, I refuse to pay for another set of rulebooks. That's just a damn corporate scam.
'Nowhere has this renunciation of man's transience been more joyous or uplifting than in the medium of airport carpets.'

User avatar
Palantyre
Posts: 984
Joined: 15 Sep 2002 01:28
Location: House of the raisin bun
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#4 Post by Palantyre » 24 Sep 2009 02:37

Led Guardian wrote:I haven't played for years, but I played 3.5. I suppose I can't judge 4.0 since I've never tried it, but I think it's bullshit anyway. :mrgreen: Besides, I refuse to pay for another set of rulebooks. That's just a damn corporate scam.
That's the spirit! :mrgreen:
Seriously though, I don't mind playing 4th ed as a snack between proper games, it's fun in small doses when not taken too seriously. We usually play it as a substitute when someone from our group is away and we're in a part in the main game where everyone should be present, like our DM usually prefers it with Dawning Star (which is this really, really awesome campaign setting for d20 modern/future).

I really recommend Pathfinder though (see the link in the OP), I've been reading the rulebook further and they have really managed to make 3.5 even cooler. :) The core classes have gotten considerably more meat on their bones, they're a lot more interesting now and have more room for customization.
And The Lord said unto John: 'Come forth and receive eternal life'.
But John came fifth, and won a toaster.

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#5 Post by Pathfinder » 24 Sep 2009 04:00

Hurray, we have our own D&D topic here! :D

First, I wanted to say that I haven't played 4th edition, but I decided that it sucks just by reading the book and rules, and seeing the changes they made. :)

For now, I'm sticking to 3.5 edition, the best one so far. Also, I've been reading a little bit about Paizo and their Pathfinder RPG game, but there is one thing that I don't understand. And that is, how can they make their own book, with core rules, when it is quite obvious that they are using everything from D&D, published by Wizards Of The Coast? Isn't that in any way illegal?
I mean, they are using the same names for pretty much everything, spells, skills, classes, even prestige classes are the same. So, they took everything from Wizards Of The Coast, and put in some of the "home rules" that they decided are the best, and made a "new" RPG game?
I don't get it. Everybody can take Wizards Of The Coast rules, and tweak them a little bit for their own campaign. Most of the DMs I know do that, but they don't go and publish it as their game.

I don't wanna sound like I'm attacking Paizo (though I'm aware that it pretty much look like it :) ), I'm just not sure how it works.

User avatar
No‘am
Posts: 614
Joined: 12 Jun 2003 19:47
Location: 42/13, Mt. Scopus/ rivertown, Western Galillee
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#6 Post by No‘am » 24 Sep 2009 05:33

Male me marem putatis? Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo

イン ウィーノー ウェーリタース

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#7 Post by Pathfinder » 24 Sep 2009 07:38

:lol:

So be it, then. :)

And, about my previous post on this topic: I think I found the reason why Paizo could do all of that, Monte Cook is one of the guys that were creating that Pathfinder version, and him being one of the most important guys from Wizards Of The Coast as well, means that he probably has some rights. :D

User avatar
Palantyre
Posts: 984
Joined: 15 Sep 2002 01:28
Location: House of the raisin bun
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#8 Post by Palantyre » 24 Sep 2009 15:40

Yeah, I did wonder that whole legal thing at one point too, but then I just figured they probably just made somesort of deal with WotC or something. Who cares how they did it, as long as they did it, right? :mrgreen:
Yeah...

>_>

<_<

*casts a magic missile at the darkness*
And The Lord said unto John: 'Come forth and receive eternal life'.
But John came fifth, and won a toaster.

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#9 Post by Pathfinder » 24 Sep 2009 19:48

Yup, you're right. :)

But still, I like 3.5 edition, and I'm not sure if it needs to be fixed at all. I didn't have any problems creating a unique character even of the class I played already.
I'll look into it more later, but for now, I'm still with 3.5. :D

jophelerks
Posts: 298
Joined: 22 Jun 2009 16:58
Location: US

Re: D&D!

#10 Post by jophelerks » 24 Sep 2009 22:42

The group I've played with uses mostly 2nd edition stuff...yeah, old school. I'm probably going to get some of my own stuff soon, don't know what edition I'll get, maybe 3.5 since it generally sounds good.
But yeah, yay for having a D & D thread!

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#11 Post by Pathfinder » 25 Sep 2009 00:22

We're expanding really fast. :p

I'm not a biggest fan of 2nd edition. I haven't played as a P&P version, but I had experienced it through games like Baldur's Gate. And, I must say that it is too confusing, and it's complicated for no reason. In 3rd edition that is fixed nicely, and 3.5 edition just improved on some little things, that made 3rd edition even better. Finesse things, like Rangers choice to pick from ranged or two weapon fighting styles.

Beren Ercharmion
Posts: 936
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 20:44
Location: Berchtesgaden, Bavaria, Germany

Re: D&D!

#12 Post by Beren Ercharmion » 25 Sep 2009 00:39

we just restarted our old AD&D 2nd edition group agian, after a year of not playing.
Due to beeing scattered across all of Austria and Germany we play using Skype now, works quite good. We try to play once a week.

Never tried the newer versions of D&D, only read through Players handbook of 3rd edition, and didn't really like it.
Ludwig Ganghofer wrote: Wen Gott liebt den lässt er fallen in dieses Land.

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#13 Post by Pathfinder » 25 Sep 2009 03:47

Well, everyone has it's own best. :) Depends of what you like, and what you expect. 2nd edition had a lot of good things in it, after all, out of 2nd edition the 3rd was made, and then modified a little bit to become 3.5 edition.

But 4th edition is somehow different, I think they've put an accent of attracting more people to the game, and by the way it looks, I would say mostly kids that played WoW.

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#14 Post by Pathfinder » 26 Sep 2009 22:30

Just so this topic don't fade away at the very beginning. :)

What is your favorite class, if you have fun? Cause I know that most of the people have a favorite class, mostly it is a class that they think resembles them in the world of fantasy. :)

User avatar
Palantyre
Posts: 984
Joined: 15 Sep 2002 01:28
Location: House of the raisin bun
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#15 Post by Palantyre » 27 Sep 2009 01:43

Well if we stick to the classes in the core book, I guess my favourite "class" is fighter/rogue. My two favourite characters so far have both been fighter-rogues, albeit not at all identical to eachother; The first was more like the traditional thiefy type with fighter levels for some added oomph, and the other basically a ranger without the tiresome treehugging aspect. :P
And The Lord said unto John: 'Come forth and receive eternal life'.
But John came fifth, and won a toaster.

User avatar
t.a.j.
Posts: 1459
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 23:29
Location: where ignorant armies clash by night
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#16 Post by t.a.j. » 27 Sep 2009 11:46

I hated 2nd edition (or AD&D), but 3rd was basically a very well designed system. What killed it was corporal politics, that is the need to continually released additional rules material, including every more powerful options for players to draw the optimization crowd to each now source book. I've seen some of Pathfinder and except for a few things - like the new smite evil repeatedly into complete nothingness - it seems quite good.
I believe that an RPG should have one rule book - or at least one fairly small set of rulebooks - e.g. one for magic, one for fighting - certainly not more than 4 and even 4 is pushing it. I think Shadowrun 4th edition is absolutely on the upper edge of whats acceptable. After that, what you need is adventures and useful background source books, fluff mostly.
But of course, the other approach makes more money. Capitalism is ruining role playing, vote communism, comrades!
http://www.gedichtblog.de
They say that there's a broken light for every heart on Broadway.
They say that life's a game, then they take the board away.
They give you masks and costumes and an outline of the story
Then leave you all to improvise their vicious cabaret...


Still the goddamn Batman.

User avatar
Palantyre
Posts: 984
Joined: 15 Sep 2002 01:28
Location: House of the raisin bun
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#17 Post by Palantyre » 27 Sep 2009 12:06

Yeah, the power creep in 3rd edition was quite noticeable. And even regardless of that, a whole lot of the stuff in the more obscure supplement books was just so ridiculous it hurt reading it. A Hulking Hurler? Ghost-faced Killer?! Jesus fucking christ, man.
The good thing is that none of those supplement books are at all required for a fully satisfying gaming experience, the three core books (or two, in Pathfinder's case) do just fine, and nobody's forcing you to use all those supplements.
That said, The Complete something series and Sword & Fist et al do have some really cool stuff that's not overpowered or cheesy... Well, not more cheesy than D&D already is, at least. :lol: (That's not to say they don't also have some real Camembert in them, though.)
And The Lord said unto John: 'Come forth and receive eternal life'.
But John came fifth, and won a toaster.

User avatar
Cerbere
Posts: 1500
Joined: 08 Feb 2009 07:34

Re: D&D!

#18 Post by Cerbere » 28 Sep 2009 03:12

I might get 3.5 except I don't really know how expensive it is and I've already bought a whole bunch of stuff for 4 since thats what all my friends have.

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#19 Post by Pathfinder » 28 Sep 2009 18:07

t.a.j. wrote:I hated 2nd edition (or AD&D), but 3rd was basically a very well designed system. What killed it was corporal politics, that is the need to continually released additional rules material, including every more powerful options for players to draw the optimization crowd to each now source book. I've seen some of Pathfinder and except for a few things - like the new smite evil repeatedly into complete nothingness - it seems quite good.
I believe that an RPG should have one rule book - or at least one fairly small set of rulebooks - e.g. one for magic, one for fighting - certainly not more than 4 and even 4 is pushing it. I think Shadowrun 4th edition is absolutely on the upper edge of whats acceptable. After that, what you need is adventures and useful background source books, fluff mostly.
But of course, the other approach makes more money. Capitalism is ruining role playing, vote communism, comrades!
This is one very well written post, my friend. Especially the last sentence. :D

Just wanna add my 2 cents. :)
I think that the 3 books of 3.5 edition are more than enough. All you need is there, there's no need for more things than that. When masters start adding things from other books they usually ruin their world, at least in my opinion. There's too many feats, classes and all kind of other stuff, which is really not needed. It even unbalances the classes, and (also in my opinion) it is mostly for the players that want to create overpowering characters.
My point is, that the rules are just guidelines, and the thing that actually makes for a good session of Dungeons and Dragons is role play. Pure and simple. With good story from the master, nice world, and good choice of people that are playing, you will get a fantastic game and experience just with those 3 books.

3rd edition would be fine as well, it's not that different than 3.5. I don't wanna say anything bad about 2nd, it is just my opinion that is it worse than 3rd or 3.5.

Oh, yeah, about the class, I forgot to wrote my own. :) I'm not sure, but mostly I like to play rangers, at least I used to play them the most, though, my best character was a Drow fighter, which I played with friend in a campaign that lasted for 100 sessions. Those were good times, and still I remember a lot of parts from that story, and jokes out of character. :D Fun times, indeed.
Rogues I like to play also...well, I like high dexterity characters for some reason. Even that Drow fighter had 20 on dexterity. Though, there are times when I'm more into role of Paladin.

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#20 Post by Pathfinder » 28 Sep 2009 18:16

Cerbere wrote:I might get 3.5 except I don't really know how expensive it is and I've already bought a whole bunch of stuff for 4 since thats what all my friends have.
Well...you can always download it over the internet, which is not nice, but it's doable. :) Either way, Wizards of the Coast are now pretty much doing what a regular capitalistic company is supposed to do: Create new stupid upgrades and new versions, even though the latest version was perfectly fine and not old enough to be replaced (though, I don't think it should be replaced at all), just to make more money.
They could have created a new game, if they wanted more money, cause I'm not paying for something that ruins something that was a perfectly good game.

The point is, I wouldn't feel bad downloading something over the internet of that company, cause that company pretty much lost my respect when they started thinking only about making more money, instead of on improvements of game experience.

User avatar
Cerbere
Posts: 1500
Joined: 08 Feb 2009 07:34

Re: D&D!

#21 Post by Cerbere » 29 Sep 2009 04:46

I downloaded the core rule books. I will just use the dungeon tiles I got from 4th edition, and I'm ready to go. I'll see if my friends are willing to try 3.5.

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#22 Post by Pathfinder » 30 Sep 2009 06:50

Good, mate. Good luck with it, I hope you'll have fun as I did. :)

Too bad I haven't played it for quite a while, I hope I will though, when I come back home.

User avatar
Palantyre
Posts: 984
Joined: 15 Sep 2002 01:28
Location: House of the raisin bun
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#23 Post by Palantyre » 30 Sep 2009 11:42

And The Lord said unto John: 'Come forth and receive eternal life'.
But John came fifth, and won a toaster.

jophelerks
Posts: 298
Joined: 22 Jun 2009 16:58
Location: US

Re: D&D!

#24 Post by jophelerks » 03 Oct 2009 21:23

I just bought a Player's Handbook, apparently it's version 3.0. Anybody know anything about that one?

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#25 Post by Pathfinder » 04 Oct 2009 03:09

jophelerks wrote:I just bought a Player's Handbook, apparently it's version 3.0. Anybody know anything about that one?
Well, it's pretty much same as the 3.5 edition. 3.5 is just an upgrade, or corrected version, fixing (maybe it's better to say improving) some of the small rules, such as giving the choice to rangers to chose from two-weapon fighting style and ranged on second level, which you can't find in 3rd edition, because you always have ranged in that one.
So, all of the tweaks are small ones, like the one above.

What I wanted to say is that everything we said for 3.5 on this topic so far, pretty much stands for 3.0 as well. I mostly played 3.0, but the last couple of sessions were 3.5, and both are good.

jophelerks
Posts: 298
Joined: 22 Jun 2009 16:58
Location: US

Re: D&D!

#26 Post by jophelerks » 04 Oct 2009 15:53

Okay, thanks.

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#27 Post by Pathfinder » 05 Oct 2009 13:25

jophelerks wrote:Okay, thanks.
Don't know if I was of any help, but you're welcome. :)

User avatar
Palantyre
Posts: 984
Joined: 15 Sep 2002 01:28
Location: House of the raisin bun
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#28 Post by Palantyre » 05 Oct 2009 19:45

By the way, if anyone ever feels like playing some good Sci-Fi for a change, I heartily recommend the Dawning Star campaign setting. It's for d20 Modern/future, so I deem it close enough to D&D for getting mentioned here. :P

We've been playing it for quite some time now, and I've thoroughly enjoyed it all the way. The basic jist in a VERY tight nutshell is that Earth has been destroyed and the few million people remaining of mankind are building a new home on a distant planet. It's a big place and the game takes place only about fifty years after the evacuation ship landed, so the new civilization is still pretty tenuous.

The setting is a lot more down-to-earth and realistic than your average sci-fi and very versatile, allowing a lot of different styles of campaigns. The frontiers lend themselves to very nice space western-y adventuring, the myriad old precursor race ruins dotting the planet are good for some sci-fi Indiana Jones dungeon delving, the different factions of settlers present opportunities for diplomatic/espionage campaigns and such (yeah, humans STILL can't live without squabbling with eachother) and of course there is a mysterious hostile insectoid alien race for your good ol-fashioned bug hunt. :)

Our campaign is pretty space western-y, although our characters are agents of the eponymous Dawning Star Republic, solving problems around the various faction camps, usually caused by the Eos Freedom League, a group of terrorists (or freedom fighters, depending on which side you are ;)).
And there are friendly aliens as well, a tribal people native to Eos and your basic enigmatic Greys, that can both be implemented for some additional flavour.

And then there's the huge optional source book called Helios Rising, that contains stuff about the whole rest of the Helios star system where Eos is located. A few different alien species inhabiting the other planets, and so forth; I don't know the details as I haven't read it, but it's seriously about 5 cm thick, so there has to be a metric arse-ton of info. Our DM has it though, and has used it, too... a crime syndicate in our campaign has been building a spaceship of their own (which is a huge whoah-whatthefuck since even the Republic only has like a handful of ships) with the intention of establishing first contact with this reptilian race living on the neighbouring planet. Which would be very very bad, because, well, they are a crime syndicate and it would be a diplomatic nightmare for the Republic.
And The Lord said unto John: 'Come forth and receive eternal life'.
But John came fifth, and won a toaster.

User avatar
Cerbere
Posts: 1500
Joined: 08 Feb 2009 07:34

Re: D&D!

#29 Post by Cerbere » 06 Oct 2009 00:23

We are actually trying to start a Sci-Fi roleplay on this forum, we need more players.

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#30 Post by Pathfinder » 22 Oct 2009 19:15

Guys, there's a chance I will start playing again after a long time with my mates, so I was thinking about 3 classes so far (for my character, of course :D), and I can't decide. So, it would be nice if you could help me out, just by saying you reasons why do you love or hate some of those 3 classes. And the classes are: Ranger, Rogue and Paladin. Maybe I would even play a Fighter.

User avatar
Palantyre
Posts: 984
Joined: 15 Sep 2002 01:28
Location: House of the raisin bun
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#31 Post by Palantyre » 23 Oct 2009 21:21

Well like I said earlier, a rogue/fighter is my #1 choice. Start as a rogue, so you'll get a nice slew of skill ranks from the get go. Another interesting class to mix in with a rogue is barbarian. Might sound silly at first, but when you think about it a little more, it makes a lot more sense. Especially if you like deviating from the archetypes like I do. :P

Rangers are cool otherwise, but to me personally the nature aspect of them is a bit overdone; being an outdoorsy type is fine, but the "guardian of the wilderness" angle isn't to my tastes. Still, the image of a more stealthy and agile warrior appeals to me more than the traditional swordsman in full plate, although individual characters of either type may have more or less flavour than usual.

And Paladins? Well, I think they have a lot of potential for being very interesting characters. Also, few things are more ridiculous than a badly roleplayed clichéd paladin. :P I love the idea of a dedicated holy warrior of righteousness, but I hate the cheesy archetypal cliché-o-ramas they so often degrade into.

All that said, Fighter is still my favourite of the "warrior classes", not because it would make an interesting character all by itself, but for its versatility and great multiclassing possibilities. So while I probably wouldn't play a pure Fighter character, I always see it worth considering to add a few Fighter levels to any less combat-oriented character.
Last edited by Palantyre on 31 Oct 2009 04:31, edited 1 time in total.
And The Lord said unto John: 'Come forth and receive eternal life'.
But John came fifth, and won a toaster.

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#32 Post by Pathfinder » 30 Oct 2009 00:55

Palantyre, thanks for help, though, I still haven't figured out what I'm going to play, and I'm going to my friends house on Saturday to create a character. :D

Still can't decide if I wanna play a melee class, or a stealth one. I'm leaning towards a rogue, but I would love to be able to stand my own ground in a fight...so, see my problem? :) And I'll need to, cause at least in the beginning there will be only two of us (plus DM of course :D).

User avatar
Palantyre
Posts: 984
Joined: 15 Sep 2002 01:28
Location: House of the raisin bun
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#33 Post by Palantyre » 31 Oct 2009 04:41

Well, I guess it comes down to what your friend(s) is (are) playing. And I don't know how quickly you'll progress in levels, but I think you should seriously consider starting as a rogue to get that hunk of skill points, putting as much in stealthy skills as you can, and then taking the next levels as a Fighter. Or if you want to be REALLY stealthy, pick Ranger instead of Fighter, they have stalthy class skills if memory serves me. A Fighter gets loads of feats, though....

So in a nutshell: Rogue for first level, next levels in a melee class, and perhaps more rogue levels later on. Seriously, even if you will have a few less hitpoints and a slightly lower BAB, sneak attack and all those ranks in Tumble will do wonders in a fight. This I know from experience. :)
And The Lord said unto John: 'Come forth and receive eternal life'.
But John came fifth, and won a toaster.

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#34 Post by Pathfinder » 01 Nov 2009 04:13

Thanks again, mate. Even though I know all that, it's good to hear someone's opinion on it. :)

Fighter doesn't have stealthy skills, though. :) And I can't stand in a one to one fight with a rogue, only if I sneak attack someone first, but that's not always an option. :)

Anyway, it is done, we moved it for Friday, so I rolled then. :) And I made a Ranger. The reason I made a Ranger was next, there's only going to be two of us playing (plus DM of course), so we'll be a duo, and we need to cover as much as possible with just two characters. But, we still wanted to create classes that we do like, not just the best possible solution.
Maybe somebody will join us later, but for now, it's just two of us, which is fine by me, I had one of the best sessions while I was playing with just one more friend.

Dungeon master and I developed a new rolling system before. It might seem a bit overpowering, but when you get to know how his campaign look like, you realize that they're not. :) It's very slow level progress, and there isn't that much magic items as well. And there is only two of us.

I'll try to explain the rolling system for abilities, cause I think it's really good and different. You have both aspects, the luck and a part you can decide where you wanna put more points and where less.
First, you have all tens and 15 ability points to move them and place them wherever you want. But, 15-16 cost 2 points, and 17-18 cost 3 points. After that you roll 12d6. And, the point is in this, you have six abilities:
1. Strength
2. Dexterity
3. Constitution
4. Intelligence
5. Wisdom
6 Charisma

Whichever number that you roll on the dice, you add that to you abilities. For instance, if you roll 2 on one dice, you add one point to dexterity, then you roll 5 you add one to the wisdom...and do that 12 times, or throw two by two, or all 12 at once, the point is the same. You won't get everything you wanted, but you'll get something else, and it gives some really nice feeling when you roll it, the anticipation. :) And the characters are more realistic, it's like the one part of your abilities you learned through your training, and the other ones you got by birth and you couldn't choose the way you'd want them to be. I think that's fair.

Anyway, back to campaign I was talking about. :)
My friend is going to play Cleric of Heironeus, and he'll be human.
His abilities are these (of course, using the system I explained above, and you'll see how odd some abilities will be):
Strength - 17
Dexterity - 11
Constitution - 18
Intelligence - 11
Wisdom - 14
Charisma - 16

You will notice that he has only 14 on Wisdom, which I think is not that good, but he's fine with it, so am I. :) Not a single dice from those 12 ended up with number 5 on top of it, so he stayed with only 14 on wisdom. Though, he got 4 or 6 on constitution, I'm not sure, so he has constitution of 18 now. But still, it's quite playable character, and a bit different than usual.

I'll play Ranger, deity will be Ehlonna most likely, and I'm pretty sure I'll play an elf.
My abilities (those are abilities that I will have if I'm definitely going to play an elf, if not, just take two off dexterity and add it to constitution, cause I'll play human otherwise):
Strength - 18
Dexterity - 19
Constitution - 13
Intelligence - 12
Wisdom - 14
Charisma - 11

I honestly wasn't planning to have strength that high, I left it at 14, though I was thinking of 12, and to put those to points on constitution instead, and I ended up getting 4 number ones on dice. Got 3 on 3 dice, got 1 dice with number 5 (wisdom), 1 with 6 (charisma) and 3 dices with number 2 (dexterity).
In the end, I'm happy how it looks like. He is stronger that I was intending for him to be, but either way, I wanted to develop on two-weapon fighting, so it's fine.
Oh, yes, we're playing by 3.5 edition rules.

And I'm sure we picked two good classes for this situation, he can fight (just look at abilities :)), can heal, and has spells; I can fight as well, have some small amount of spells, and I can sneak if needed, plus companion and ranged weapon...and knowing that we're starting in a huge forest, where we played a small part before, ranger will definitely be useful.

Sorry for a long post, I hope I haven't wrote all of this for nothing. :)

User avatar
Cerbere
Posts: 1500
Joined: 08 Feb 2009 07:34

Re: D&D!

#35 Post by Cerbere » 04 Nov 2009 04:07

I mainly DM and I developed a good way (I think) for inns to be fair, and players don't just but the cheapest one. When the player goes to sleep, he rolls a d20 to see if he got sleep. If he rolls above a set number, dependent on the quality of the inn, he gets a good sleep, gets an action point, etc. If not, he doesn't get action points but still gets sort of rested. I also do a similar thing for stables to see if the horses are stolen. I don't know if it's totally ordinary, or if I'm crazy but its what I do.

Led Guardian
Posts: 2427
Joined: 26 Mar 2008 21:08
Location: Somewhere less cliché than far beyond

Re: D&D!

#36 Post by Led Guardian » 04 Nov 2009 22:58

Sounds like a combination of the NWN ability score system and the normal one, with an extra bit thrown in. Interesting. Also, when I played I did it with 2 other people and we alternated DMing, and the DM played characters as well. Actually, to have a full party we each played 2. If your DM is honest and skilled enough, cheating and metagaming isn't an issue.
'Nowhere has this renunciation of man's transience been more joyous or uplifting than in the medium of airport carpets.'

User avatar
t.a.j.
Posts: 1459
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 23:29
Location: where ignorant armies clash by night
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#37 Post by t.a.j. » 05 Nov 2009 11:16

I don't think luck should play any part in character generation. By all light of reason, the player of the cleric is by luck forced into a meele role he might not like. Then again, the scores come out good enough in any case to be able to play almost anything you want.
http://www.gedichtblog.de
They say that there's a broken light for every heart on Broadway.
They say that life's a game, then they take the board away.
They give you masks and costumes and an outline of the story
Then leave you all to improvise their vicious cabaret...


Still the goddamn Batman.

User avatar
Palantyre
Posts: 984
Joined: 15 Sep 2002 01:28
Location: House of the raisin bun
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#38 Post by Palantyre » 05 Nov 2009 23:46

The point-buy system for ability scores is indeed the most sensible, but then again the potential to get really good scores with rolling is rather appealing. :P Once I rolled a character with scores something like 18, 18, 16, 15, 16, 12...
And The Lord said unto John: 'Come forth and receive eternal life'.
But John came fifth, and won a toaster.

Led Guardian
Posts: 2427
Joined: 26 Mar 2008 21:08
Location: Somewhere less cliché than far beyond

Re: D&D!

#39 Post by Led Guardian » 06 Nov 2009 23:33

I got one that was something like 18 18 18 17 16 15.
'Nowhere has this renunciation of man's transience been more joyous or uplifting than in the medium of airport carpets.'

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#40 Post by Pathfinder » 07 Nov 2009 23:30

Led Guardian wrote:Sounds like a combination of the NWN ability score system and the normal one, with an extra bit thrown in. Interesting. Also, when I played I did it with 2 other people and we alternated DMing, and the DM played characters as well. Actually, to have a full party we each played 2. If your DM is honest and skilled enough, cheating and metagaming isn't an issue.
Well, actually that guy loves melee, so I'm quite sure he doesn't mind it. :) And, if he wanted, he could have placed more points in wisdom to begin with, but he didn't, so, it's not like you don't have a choice.
If you ask me, it gives more of a depth to characters when you don't put it as you want to completely, to be as perfect as possible, cause then most of the characters start to look alike (of the same class, of course).

And, I must disagree with you on luck thing. Though, I respect your opinion. :)
I just reason that like this, when you're born you get abilities, based on your parents genes. So, you can't choose that, and that's a kind of luck, just as the country in which you're going to be born in, you can't choose that. If your father for instance is not a very gifted athlete, you will have a lower abilities in your physical stats by birth, but you can improve them at least a little bit by training, thus you have a 15 points to place them wherever you want.
On the other hand, you will maybe have better charisma, or something else that your parents were also good at, and you're not at loss. For instance, you will have lower strength (a little bit) than you were hoping for, but you'll get wisdom, or charisma...Maybe it won't make the overpowering character, but it surely adds to role play. And in case of cleric, it's not big of a deal at all. :)

And considering those high roles you guys are talking about, I have to say that I'm not very fond of that as well...it ruins a little bit a character to me when all of his roles are almost the same. I always want to have few things that I do better and few that I'm OK in, but not great, and I think it's...well, not fun, when you have +4 to everything. I had a character that had high abilities as well, and I'm sure that other players don't like it when you play a wizard that has the same strength as your party's fighter, for instance. It weakens his role in the party.

Just my view of those things. :)

User avatar
t.a.j.
Posts: 1459
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 23:29
Location: where ignorant armies clash by night
Contact:

Re: D&D!

#41 Post by t.a.j. » 08 Nov 2009 12:55

I deeply believe that reasoning like "you can't choose your genes" is quite bad. It's the kind of reasoning we find in early DnD, some half-smart remark towards life in the real world to justify a game design decision. I think design decisions should be based on what works how in the game and on what makes the game enjoyable to play.
http://www.gedichtblog.de
They say that there's a broken light for every heart on Broadway.
They say that life's a game, then they take the board away.
They give you masks and costumes and an outline of the story
Then leave you all to improvise their vicious cabaret...


Still the goddamn Batman.

User avatar
Nightfall5
Posts: 10
Joined: 09 Nov 2009 00:27

Re: D&D!

#42 Post by Nightfall5 » 10 Nov 2009 07:03

I just recently started playing D&D, and all we use is 4.0 . After playing video games like Neverwinter Nights 2, I really wanted to play 3.5 rules, but there aren't any sold where I live, only 4.0 . I still think it's a blast to play, although no one in my group really knows how to play that well :P but I think 3.5 would have been much more fun, with things like multi-classing, which is awesome. I dunno, I wish we had 3.5 rules, but it doesn't really matter to me, 4.0 is still lots of fun to play.
UNDER THE ICE YOU WILL BE FREE

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#43 Post by Pathfinder » 10 Nov 2009 13:42

t.a.j. wrote:I deeply believe that reasoning like "you can't choose your genes" is quite bad. It's the kind of reasoning we find in early DnD, some half-smart remark towards life in the real world to justify a game design decision. I think design decisions should be based on what works how in the game and on what makes the game enjoyable to play.
The point is that abilities shouldn't be all that important about enjoying the game. You need them when you roll for something, but the fun part to me is in role play, and I don't need abilities for role play. And with this system, where you get a little part of luck on your abilities gives me more options to improve and develop my character's background, and personality.

And either way, my character wouldn't have been all that different if I have chosen all of the abilities myself. Those are only a little changes if you put more abilities in the beginning where you need them the most. I just don't get it why do you think it will ruin the enjoyment of game itself. We tried that last time, and none of the players was unhappy with his abilities, and we had best created characters, story wise.

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#44 Post by Pathfinder » 10 Nov 2009 13:45

Nightfall5 wrote:I just recently started playing D&D, and all we use is 4.0 . After playing video games like Neverwinter Nights 2, I really wanted to play 3.5 rules, but there aren't any sold where I live, only 4.0 . I still think it's a blast to play, although no one in my group really knows how to play that well :P but I think 3.5 would have been much more fun, with things like multi-classing, which is awesome. I dunno, I wish we had 3.5 rules, but it doesn't really matter to me, 4.0 is still lots of fun to play.
You can find 3.5 edition on the internet. Just download it, and if you need a book, just get it printed. :)

User avatar
Cerbere
Posts: 1500
Joined: 08 Feb 2009 07:34

Re: D&D!

#45 Post by Cerbere » 11 Nov 2009 01:02

The only bad part about doing that is the price of paper and ink, as for me I just keep a laptop with the pdf on it and use that

Hansi Smurf
Posts: 454
Joined: 19 Aug 2004 22:22
Location: Central Park, Winnipeg, Canada

the 1980's Version

#46 Post by Hansi Smurf » 25 Dec 2009 04:48

Y'know, there used to be a Maiden Traez writing here, and I wrote Duluth, Wisconsin, 'stead of Duluth, Minnesota,
in a message between us, proving fallible once more! The funny thing was that I'd spent a summer vacation in Duluth once upon a time, buying the 1980's D&D Expert set there from the Target Store at the Mall!

People get on me for my occasional "bigger is superior" rantings, yet G. Gary Gygax himself wouldn't allow Elves, Dwarves or Halflings to pass the 10th, 12th, or 8th Levels respectively within the Fighters Guild entitlements!

And just so you all become better Martial Scientists, "Sports Illustrated Wrestling", 1979, reports that when two NCAA or AAU athletes with the same letter grade face one another, the stronger of the two in the weightroom wins every time!

If I had been allowed to manage Paul Wight against Floyd Mayweather when they clashed at Wrestlemania, the Big Show would have destroyed the much physically weaker, much smaller-brained negro, easily. But so much for the Giants of the Earth; their letter grades must be feeble, their reputed slowness of wit must be true! Why else do the big-brained Type A's John Cena and Triple H defeat them most every time?

To further illustrate my "bigger is superior" factoid, I will point to my knowledge of wisdom teeth removal. A 5'4" man can have all four of his wisdom teeth pulled in mere moments. A 6'4" man takes an hour a tooth! The Big Show and the Great Khali should never lose wrestling matches against anyone as small as Batista or the Undertaker, so long as a technically sound Type A such as myself, Dr. Graham Superstar, is managing them. Andre the Giant's loss to Hulk Hogan at 'Mania was certainly caused by Andre suffering from a broken back and thus not being much of an active wrestling champion.

These wrestling coachings are unlike the deathliness of D&D, however. Wrestlers and music listeners are all good guys! Inside D&D, I learned from watching the dice that neutral and lawful characters are charmed when faced against my killer chaots, whilst goblins, kobolds and the other monsters were seemingly massacred by a self-aware superdetermined Universe!!! Truly, Borak and Arnak smashed all whom their eyes saw, but the charmed dice still made unarmed townspersons harder to slay and twice as deadly as any armed monster!

My only problem with these dice-game based scientific findings is the question of how on Earth, on August 7, 2007 did the Pigs get to bug me, taze me, poison me and restraining-order me, me, a law-abiding Town Divinity, lacking any Moral Weaknesses?!?

I love D&D, and I really hope that Marvel and TSR will seriously consider manufacturing the "Thor: King of the Universe" story I have concieved of, based upon the 1980's D&D gaming outline. Tasty artwork, certainly.

And remember: Everyone, regardless of stature or race, is equal under the Law.

Hansi Smurf
Posts: 454
Joined: 19 Aug 2004 22:22
Location: Central Park, Winnipeg, Canada

An Interesting Observation of 18+3, circa 1981.

#47 Post by Hansi Smurf » 27 Jan 2010 05:55

In the old days, 18+3 was the maximum score for any attribute: strength, intelligence, wisdom, dexterity, constitution, charisma.

All the fighters in all the TSR drawings circa 1981, have zero Conan physique, yet all must have prerequisite 13-18 strength. Gauntlets of ogre power grant a player character 18+3 strength, so the fighters standing 6' 3" tall or so, all have the strength of an 18 foot tall man-monster, all whilst possessing mostly normal appearing physiques and statures!

To my mind the Guilds have been an overlooked part of Dungeons and Dragons! The Fighters Guild must be providing their members with a super-strength potion or some other charm, for them to be as strong as they are! 12 is the High Town strength of your average champion bodybuilder or hard-working drill-press operator (see, Darth Bane). Too, it is the Guilds whom grant you your character's uplevelings in combat skills and hit points (life-force). I've never met a Dungeon Master yet who understood this gaming fact!

The only player characters with superskills, without any Guild interference would be the Clerics, whom if truly Divine, most likely recieve their gifts from within the Invisible Landscape of the Gods.

Interestingly, of my two fighter characters, Black Kilgore has merely 1 point more of strength, and 1 more point of dexterity, yet that was enuff for him to outkill Stone the Toad 2 to 1! They are both berzerker badguys, after all, so who knows? Maybe Stone the Toad will soon be Stone the Dead, at the hands of the my "named after ancestors" outlaw Black Kilgore?

Led Guardian
Posts: 2427
Joined: 26 Mar 2008 21:08
Location: Somewhere less cliché than far beyond

Re: D&D!

#48 Post by Led Guardian » 28 Jan 2010 21:36

:?
Last edited by Led Guardian on 30 Jan 2010 19:27, edited 1 time in total.
'Nowhere has this renunciation of man's transience been more joyous or uplifting than in the medium of airport carpets.'

User avatar
Pathfinder
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 20:19
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: D&D!

#49 Post by Pathfinder » 30 Jan 2010 16:37

I missed something...what's Nightmare?

Led Guardian
Posts: 2427
Joined: 26 Mar 2008 21:08
Location: Somewhere less cliché than far beyond

Re: D&D!

#50 Post by Led Guardian » 30 Jan 2010 19:28

I don't know how the hell that post got there. It wasn't supposed to be in this topic. :?
'Nowhere has this renunciation of man's transience been more joyous or uplifting than in the medium of airport carpets.'

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests