Opinions: d20 3rd ed.

[Spike]

I always wondered about that myself. I mean just look what the new editions do with half-orcs.

To be honest, I like the steeper XP curve of older editions in general. It seems in newer versions the characters advance so quickly..and the XP dealt out even-handed regardless of individual player merit so the whole party levels up at the same time just smack of what they call "social promotion" in public schools.

Right now, our party ranges from 1st level hirelings to 3rd level PCs to 5th level PCs. The added issue of burdening the higher-level characters with protecting the lower level characters gives the game more gritty role-playing oomph.

[baran_i_kanu]

Ascending AC....i do like that.

and it was indeed very glossy and pretty, other than the spiky buckley armory art. ugh.


dave

[Benoist]

Ascending AC and d20 + modifiers for resolutions are the biggies, really. IMO.
Same XP charts for everybody made the relative power of each class or game element (monster hit die etc) compared to each other more easily. This too was a great evolution, but it did come with its own set of pitfalls. Mainly, the obsession about "game balance".

[Bandigerbolls]

This too was a great evolution, but it did come with its own set of pitfalls. Mainly, the obsession about "game balance".

It seems to me that the various XP tables were evidence that balance was a fixation from day 0. Once the XP tables were leveled, it removed one of the previous tools for rebalancing the classes, and they started fiddling with other things.

[Benoist]

This too was a great evolution, but it did come with its own set of pitfalls. Mainly, the obsession about "game balance".

It seems to me that the various XP tables were evidence that balance was a fixation from day 0. Once the XP tables were leveled, it removed one of the previous tools for rebalancing the classes, and they started fiddling with other things.

Agreed.

[Nellisir]

It seems to me that the various XP tables were evidence that balance was a fixation from day 0. Once the XP tables were leveled, it removed one of the previous tools for rebalancing the classes, and they started fiddling with other things.

I've been thinking about this recently, particularly at higher levels, and I'm having trouble seeing Xp tables as an actual balancing mechanism. But it's a topic I'd need to do a little more research on, and a different thread.

[pspboy7]

I agree that ascending AC and dividing saving throws into three distinct groups was a good idea. The addition of feats was the worst idea because it created an atmosphere of min maxing your character.

[DuBeers]

It seems to me that the various XP tables were evidence that balance was a fixation from day 0. Once the XP tables were leveled, it removed one of the previous tools for rebalancing the classes, and they started fiddling with other things.

As I understand the meaning of the words , it is a big leap from attempting to achieve a goal to a "fixation" on a goal. Any game that includes multiple roles will try to achieve a degree of balance, while allowing for a difference in play styles. Being fixated on it, however, would indicate that other considerations would become secondary to that one aim.

Now keep in mind, I'm not saying 3E is doing that. I am subjectively saying it is clear to me that the first edition of the game did not do that.

[Bandigerbolls]

As I understand the meaning of the words , it is a big leap from attempting to achieve a goal to a "fixation" on a goal.

Maybe I overstated that. I was young and impetuous then.

[DuBeers]

Maybe I overstated that. I was young and impetuous then.

(chuckle) As were (or are, as they case may be) we all ...