Log in

No account? Create an account
D&D 3E
Books, a few comments, and Monte Cook is the man 
18th-Sep-2005 01:31 pm
Well the only way to do something is to just dive right in and do it. Many of you here have answered a lot of the questions I have had in far more detail then I had expected (which is awesome, thank you).

So I got my hands on D&D Players/DMs guide, Unearthed Arcana, Libris Mortis, Book of Vile Darkness and some book on dragons.

Why all the material? 2 reasons.

1: To get a real feel for what is going on. I have been “out of the loop” for years (about the time magic the gathering took over gaming).

2: Depending on how I am going to do things I want to see how my game world fits into what Wotc has.

Made some good comments concerning content

I agree with what you said about the “Kit books”. While they were in some cases a fun and some what interesting read they did not contain anything I could not come up with myself.

The reason why I created my game world was to have a balance of both role play and combat. When we created our own system we tried to reflect this with stats and various kinds of dice roles.

And yes, dagger spell mage is…well…dumb.

Btw I really like this Monte Cook guy.

But back to my point there are a number of things I see wrong with the 3.5 and there are things that I like about it. I guess no system is really perfect. One of my concerns is that the system we had created (for my game) is to complex and that people will not be into it at all.
18th-Sep-2005 05:43 pm (UTC)
Yeah. That whole dagger spell thing was painful to even read. I am surprised it found its way into the book at all.
18th-Sep-2005 08:52 pm (UTC)
Yeah that was pretty bad.
For a whole other level of pain read some of the later Cyberpunk source books. I would really like to know what they were thinking when they wrote some of that stuff.

19th-Sep-2005 12:02 am (UTC) - IMHO!
The books people should be putting out are re: BEING A DAMN FINE DM/GM.
I'll play Advanced Calculus & Dragons if there's a good GM.
19th-Sep-2005 04:20 am (UTC) - Re: IMHO!
Find the 4th derivative of the function g(x) at 0 to see if you hit
19th-Sep-2005 05:26 am (UTC) - Re: IMHO!
19th-Sep-2005 01:50 am (UTC)
The best part is that one of my players wanted to play it.
19th-Sep-2005 02:03 am (UTC)
19th-Sep-2005 04:21 am (UTC)
If one of my players pulled that I might beat them with a mace.
19th-Sep-2005 07:44 pm (UTC)
He's a powergamer. He called it "just cool," but I knew there were alterior motives. There's always alterior motives with the powergamer.

How to powergame that prestige class though, well...I haven't put the mental energy into figuring that one out.
20th-Sep-2005 12:23 am (UTC)
I still would have beat him with a mace

hmm. There has to be something to that. I would look closly at the class and see what does what.
19th-Sep-2005 01:11 am (UTC)
The best thing you can do, I think, is to use the books WotC has released as a tool for adding new and interesting content to your game world- things you might not otherwise have thought of, just to spice things up a bit.

Important in this process is that you tweak everything liberally so that it fits right- and nobody ever said that you couldn't tweak mechanics as well as description! If something is too complicated for your tastes, you are totally within your rights to simplify it and present that simplified version to your players (though you might want to let them know you've done so, or even go so far as to give them a choice between your version and the original).

(You can also go the other way, if you want to. I'm considering using an entirely redesigned initiative system, which grants people one single action on each of their turns, and gives them turns more often if they are dextrous, or if they would normally have multiple attacks per round, etc. Luckily it's something I've worked up in Excel, and all of the complexity is DM-side...)
19th-Sep-2005 01:53 am (UTC)
All that Wizards release I think can be rhetorically known as resources. You don't have to use all the rules presented. You can even just use 10% of them if you like, whichever sound good, and make you think what you already have will run on a less complicated level. Either way, the biggest thing about 3.5 is to stress that whole "the DM is always right" principle, because there's stuff that everyone thinks needs some tweaking on, it's just a matter of what that stuff is.

Of course, consistency, once those changes have been made, always comforts the wary PC that is thrown off by the fact some of the rules don't apply. :-p

I personally don't use half the combat rules of the 3.5 system, just because I have some lower IQ players that still haven't quite figured out the gist of what you roll to attack and damage.
(Deleted comment)
19th-Sep-2005 04:23 am (UTC)
Not because I wrote about them but the Undead from my game kick ass. I like some of the stuff they did (so far that I have seen) in Libris Mortis but honestly it looks like they held back often.

The Book of Vile Darkness looks like a total horror fest which I personally like and can't wait to read.
19th-Sep-2005 06:35 am (UTC)
Hey, if you think you've done cool things with undead, I think more than one of us would be happy to hear about them. ^_~
20th-Sep-2005 12:25 am (UTC)
If all goes well then I will have it all done real soon. We are reworking a few things and trying to get a good artist to work with us. For some reason that has been impossible in the past (One went to the marines, the other hooked on drugs and kind of lost his mind).

I am going to look for people to play test what we have when we are done so I would be more then happy to send you a copy.
This page was loaded May 25th 2018, 8:36 pm GMT.