|
|
Post by mullmann on Sept 21, 2014 22:48:33 GMT
Don't bother with this fucking game.
|
|
|
|
Post by distortedhumor on Sept 22, 2014 0:06:59 GMT
There is a good game in 3.5/pathfinder. Just requires houserules cutting back stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by eliana on Oct 8, 2014 16:20:11 GMT
As a normal behavior rule... you shouldn't post in a system thread to shit on the "system" ...
Just go your way and post about your interests in the proper Forum(s) or thread(s) if any!!!
Like registering on a Forum about Classics RPGs to rant against them and promote Newer Editions.
That is silly and being a Troll!!!
Éli,
|
|
|
|
Post by mullmann on Oct 9, 2014 2:43:15 GMT
Eliana, thank you for your advices in this attacks of oppor tuna titties forums thread. As you can mostly tell English is not my first language but I get along Ok.
The only enemies I keep are Janissaries but that is another story for another time so i would be wishing only peace upon your house
I would invite you to keep posting in this forum threads
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Huthor on Oct 10, 2014 4:27:51 GMT
Wrote a huge post about this subject yesterday, but the lap-top consigned it to oblivion somehow as I was finishing it.
So abbreviated version:
There's never been a good or bad edition of (A)D&D. Some just resound better with others.
I think the perceived faults usually come once an edition spread beyond it's core books. For 3E/3.5 it did for me at least. It just kind of crushed itself under it's own weight with the deluge of additional material. I know you can ignore additional add-ons, but there were a number of instances where published material drew from add-on stuff that it probably shouldn't have (no, I can't recall precise example atm).
I don't know if that was purely for marketing purposes, or if it was felt that nothing in the core rules would suffice.
As to previous posts:
I think it's fine to say you don't like an edition/product. I usually like some sort of reason why to be provided. Just for a sense of understanding the perspective. It can save people a lot of time and money if nothing else. And if someone proves to give good reasoning for one thing, I'm more likely to listen to further advice from them.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris107 on Oct 27, 2014 8:59:12 GMT
Having only played 3.0 on a half dozen occasions I have to say I enjoyed it. There were bits that were long winded and tiresome, attacks of opportunity been a good example along with weapon reach and the vast list of skills.
There were however some very good parts. Feats and a magic system that let's spell casters make a big contribution from the start.
Yes it takes away from the simplicity of 1e and must be a bugger to DM/write for but as a player it allowed me to create an interesting and unique character who I had great fun with.
I guess like with most RPG's it all comes down to the quality of the game setting and the company you're with?
I'd be more than happy to give it another go if I got chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malcadon on Oct 28, 2014 16:04:02 GMT
It is the only system that punishes players who want to wrestle/grapple with needlessly onerous rules! When someone says "I want to initiate a grapple.", it should be this quick and awesome:  |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 8, 2015 9:49:19 GMT
There are rules for attacks of opportunity in 1e, though they are not clearly designated as such.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malcadon on Aug 9, 2015 1:26:26 GMT
"attacks of oppor-tuna-titties"...? What? Do fish have mammaries? Is it like an attack of opportunity, but you get purple-nurples by random biting fish if you drop your guard?  Oh yeah, they do have tits! |
|
|
|
Post by thesicilian on Aug 25, 2015 3:21:13 GMT
My mind jumped right to 'Tuna Girl' of the warhammer 40k universe. Tau titties?
|
|
|
|
Post by genghisdon on Mar 31, 2017 1:20:41 GMT
Tuna don't have titties! what are you, a 4e artist that puts titties on lizards?  AOO's are good actually, and they came from 2e PO:C&T (albeit not refined as they are later on). I do recall, though, that my players had a very steep learning curve regarding them (& 3e in general) back in 2000. Stick with it, it's not rocket science. You can get proficient or master the rules quick enough. Hell, just thinking of feats chains like combat reflexes, hold the line, close quarters combat, etc, slathered in with stuff like improved trip (hold the spiked chain cheese please!) or stand still, or dodge/mobility/spring attack/bounding assault/rapid blitz, elusive target, sidestep, shot on the run, & karmic strike, makes me want to break out the battle maps & minis to play some d20 on either side of the screen!
Malcadon: clearly you jest about grappling? Sure it is a bit of a pain in d20 (again, once one gets it, it's not so bad as the jokes all would have one believe), but come on, grappling/unarmed rules are utterly shit in 1e, 2e, etc, as well. Same for most games, if they exist at all. As prespos alludes, as well, "AOOs" existed before being called that in AD&D, for example, and not only for running away from combat, but for armed vs unarmed combat. |
|
