Ultimate Showdown: 3.0 vs. 3.5

[Tequila Sunrise]

Now imagine if that warrior had magical weapons he made himself. Other then making these magical weapons and other gear, he shows no other magical ability. Could he still be a 'warrior'? I think so but I'll see your opinion.

Same deal as the arse lightning. If the author provides an explanation, or hints at one somehow, then it's cool. Even if the hint is as vague as the author describing how the warrior regularly prays to Zeus and ritualistically bathes his blade in blessed water, or how the warrior mentions spending time with the Immortal Raven Mystics. Then when his sword shoots lightning and he says 'Yeah I made this,' we buy it. But if there's no explanation before or after this otherwise-mundane warrior claims to have forged his magical sword, we assume he's lying. Or that the author's a moron.

[Korwin]

What's more shocking is that he has played a 3.5 game and actually thinks non casters can protect anyone, even themselves.

I dont think so, if the casters where played by incompetent players,
he could come to the conclusion that his Monk isnt so bad.

But if he didnt know how initiative works...
I suppose you could play D&D (any edition) and have not an single fight.
I can imagine such a thing, but my question would be, why use the D&D (any edition) ruleset for this kind of game.

[Lago PARANOIA]

I can imagine such a thing, but my question would be, why use the D&D (any edition) ruleset for this kind of game.

Because D&D is the biggest game in town.

[shadzar]

For the asshats that wish to debate something that is not even on topic for this thread, but like to discus people rather than topics....

The retards didn't know how to tie their own shoelaces. I wouldn't DM a game of checkers for them.

They did know how to munchkin optimize very well, and tried to get me to do it as well.

I played a monk as I wanted, not how some optimization-Nazi wanted me to play. That is why I had fun. I didn't let some feat or shit hold me back form doing what I wanted in the game. I rarely looked at the feats, or initiative.

Group initiative means DM rolls once and chooses the order the baddies go in when it is his turn, PC party rolls once and assign the order the PCs will go in.

One person was in charge of combat supervision (you can call him the "leader" role), one was a party treasurer that collected the treasures to hand out later when we had time to divide thing up other than silly things needed during combat. Others had other jobs within the party.

Maybe you should try group initiative. It speeds play greatly and each round the sides can go in whatever order they think best.

My monk did "his" thing not worrying with how others played monks. The reasons some others had less fun, was because they were playing the rules, not the game. Prior to the end more of those who started with 3rd edition started playing the game not the rules and were beginning to have more fun, and cared less about the optimization because it forced them into a small hole that they would fit.

So if your only attempt to play a monk include unarmed strike with a quarterstaff for the flurry of blows and bonuses, then maybe that is why you didn't have fun doing it?

[erik]

The retards didn't know how to tie their own shoelaces. I wouldn't DM a game of checkers for them.

They did know how to munchkin optimize very well, and tried to get me to do it as well.

Among retards, the noob who plays the weakest class in the game is king.

Did I translate that right?

That's essentially what Korwin suggested anyway (though he was nicer about it than you were).



[edit: As an aside, not knowing what you can do with your character and thus accidentally choosing a crappy feat/class/etc can lead to severe disappointment in game. I wouldn't be especially proud of ignorance.

The group initiative house rule could speed things up, or it could take longer if you have some players like in my group who hem and haw whenever they have a decision of any time to make. At least when they have their own initiative they know when it is their exact turn to go.

Group initiative does kind of hinge upon how it is implemented (i.e. it is either bad one way or bad another way). If someone has a +18 init (that's a good bonus, btw), would everyone go on that init, or would the character have wasted their time getting that bonus?

[Roy]

What's more shocking is that he has played a 3.5 game and actually thinks non casters can protect anyone, even themselves.

I dont think so, if the casters where played by incompetent players,
he could come to the conclusion that his Monk isnt so bad.

But if he didnt know how initiative works...
I suppose you could play D&D (any edition) and have not an single fight.
I can imagine such a thing, but my question would be, why use the D&D (any edition) ruleset for this kind of game.

Irrelevant. Even if the Monk wasn't being outclassed by his fellow casters because they were that bad, and he somehow wasn't being outclassed by the enemies (based on how he's talking, he likely cheated to do this) that still doesn't let him protect anyone.

[erik]

Irrelevant. Even if the Monk wasn't being outclassed by his fellow casters because they were that bad, and he somehow wasn't being outclassed by the enemies (based on how he's talking, he likely cheated to do this) that still doesn't let him protect anyone.

I suspect either rule zero, or the DM was at least as incompetent (which can still lead to nasty TPKs... since they are as likely to overshoot as undershoot difficulty in combats), or perhaps they just got a lot of softballing and easy fights.

What's weirder in my eyes is his rabid insistence that he had fun, and with equal rabidity that he would never play or buy that game.

[hogarth]

What's weirder in my eyes is his rabid insistence that he had fun, and with equal rabidity that he would never play or buy that game.

I'm still trying to figure out one can make an unarmed strike with a quarterstaff.

[shadzar]

Try reading the rules for unarmed strike. PHB pg 41 is what my sheet tells me for it.

[shadzar]

The retards didn't know how to tie their own shoelaces. I wouldn't DM a game of checkers for them.

They did know how to munchkin optimize very well, and tried to get me to do it as well.

Among retards, the noob who plays the weakest class in the game is king.

Did I translate that right?

That's essentially what Korwin suggested anyway (though he was nicer about it than you were).

No you are just being a closet cock-sucker.

Again it proves the problem with the fucking 3tards. "Weekest class"...ok so you already want to make everything be DM v players because all DMs are assholes, but now you try to compete with every other player in the fucking group to see who wins some MVP contest?

It is a fucking COOPERATIVE game. You work together, not against each other. When assholes stop trying to beat the other fucking players, then shit like 4th edition wouldn't need to exist where you have to have a written rule for everything because assholes cannot look up COOPERATIVE in the dictionary, and still want to play competitively with the other player in the PC party group.

That is the problems with the munchkin optimizers. They think only the highest order of magnitude collections of stats are things worth playing.

HOW FUCKING STUPID! Learn to play the game, not to manipulate the rules, and blame the DM because you are playing the rules and not the game.

[edit: As an aside, not knowing what you can do with your character and thus accidentally choosing a crappy feat/class/etc can lead to severe disappointment in game. I wouldn't be especially proud of ignorance.

The group initiative house rule could speed things up, or it could take longer if you have some players like in my group who hem and haw whenever they have a decision of any time to make. At least when they have their own initiative they know when it is their exact turn to go.

Group initiative does kind of hinge upon how it is implemented (i.e. it is either bad one way or bad another way). If someone has a +18 init (that's a good bonus, btw), would everyone go on that init, or would the character have wasted their time getting that bonus?

I did NOT do the initiative, so was not in charge of anything, but going when my turn came during a round. The person responsible for combat order was in charge of everything for the PC group. It was the player decision before we began play, so that combat would not be drawn out.

For all I know the initiative bonuses, could have been averaged for the whole group, likewise for the encounter entities we were against. I don't know. It wasn't my job to know.

MY job was standing near negotiations as a githzerai and look menacing without doing anything in order to get favor to our side for anything being negotiated. I would often cough, or ask a question that was for the purpose of intimidating the opponent in the negotiations. Otherwise I did what I wanted in non crucial areas, and fought who I wanted when combat came around to my turn, unless there was a need with the "5 free words" rule that someone instructed me to "monk go help/protect/defend/attack blah blah" that could be said at anything during combat.

The group worked together with the exception of those who wanted to bring OOC knowledge IC and use it.

How is it so hard to understand when working together you trust the other people, not hen-peck them for details as it is THEIR responsibility not yours. You take care of your shit, and make sure you do YOUR job correctly. If you are too bust worrying about someone else's job then you are surely going to fuck yours up.

As for ax decisions, you had to plan that at the start of or before combat as the group decided the best actions. Fighter rush in and take the mage mass effect spell and then healed by the cleric, leaving the enemies weakened...it is called tactics. Like running a stunt left, or whatever those stupid football plays are called.

[erik]

Adiós.

[Roy]

No you are just being a closet cock-sucker.

Again it proves the problem with the fucking 3tards. "Weekest class"...ok so you already want to make everything be DM v players because all DMs are assholes, but now you try to compete with every other player in the fucking group to see who wins some MVP contest?

It is a fucking COOPERATIVE game. You work together, not against each other. When assholes stop trying to beat the other fucking players, then shit like 4th edition wouldn't need to exist where you have to have a written rule for everything because assholes cannot look up COOPERATIVE in the dictionary, and still want to play competitively with the other player in the PC party group.

Wait, you do LIKE the editions prior to third, right? Make up your mind.

[Tequila Sunrise]

What's weirder in my eyes is his rabid insistence that he had fun, and with equal rabidity that he would never play or buy that game.

I had fun playing a session OD&D, but I'll never buy it or suggest playing it over another edition. Maybe that's not exactly what Shadzar said, but it is possible to have fun playing an inferior game by ignoring the crappy rules as much as possible and just focussing on the rp.

[shadzar]

No you are just being a closet cock-sucker.

Again it proves the problem with the fucking 3tards. "Weekest class"...ok so you already want to make everything be DM v players because all DMs are assholes, but now you try to compete with every other player in the fucking group to see who wins some MVP contest?

It is a fucking COOPERATIVE game. You work together, not against each other. When assholes stop trying to beat the other fucking players, then shit like 4th edition wouldn't need to exist where you have to have a written rule for everything because assholes cannot look up COOPERATIVE in the dictionary, and still want to play competitively with the other player in the PC party group.

Wait, you do LIKE the editions prior to third, right? Make up your mind.

What does that question have to do with the quoted post you made edits to?

What's weirder in my eyes is his rabid insistence that he had fun, and with equal rabidity that he would never play or buy that game.

I had fun playing a session OD&D, but I'll never buy it or suggest playing it over another edition. Maybe that's not exactly what Shadzar said, but it is possible to have fun playing an inferior game by ignoring the crappy rules as much as possible and just focussing on the rp.

Something like that. I was playing 2nd edition in the 3.5 game. Meaning I wasn't focusing on a collection of feats or skills and how to "build" them, but made the persona of my character, and had that character act consistent with the views I had set up for it. Also showing those other people how you don't need to try to play a collection of stats, but play the character and let the stats be something that only minimally effect the game, was fun.

[Psychic Robot]

I'm so confused. How is the monk making an unarmed strike with a quarterstaff?

[Roy]

What does that question have to do with the quoted post you made edits to?

I bolded the relevant sections for emphasis. I did not change the content of your post in the slightest, and have screenshotted it in case you try to change it and claim you didn't say that.

[shadzar]

I'm so confused. How is the monk making an unarmed strike with a quarterstaff?

I don't have the PHB, only the eTools.

IIRC, a monk can make unarmed strikes even when his (the book said her for all things monk) hands are not empty. Elbows, knees, feet, headbutts, etc.

My often used move was sticking the quarterstaff in the ground and thrusting upward with me feet for like a stationary flying kick, or actually use it to pole vault over one person to use flurry of blows on someone in the rear ranks.

Also flurry of blows didn't have to be the same attack as I was told, so mix some quarterstaff attacks with unarmed strikes and split the flurry up between them.

EDIT: LOL "furry of blows"!

[shadzar]

What does that question have to do with the quoted post you made edits to?

I bolded the relevant sections for emphasis. I did not change the content of your post in the slightest, and have screenshotted it in case you try to change it and claim you didn't say that.

I said you editted it. Format changes are edits. I still don't get what you are trying to ask in relation to those bolded parts, and your question about earlier editions.

[Guyr Adamantine]

I said you editted it. Format changes are edits. I still don't get what you are trying to ask in relation to those bolded parts, and your question about earlier editions.

Everything he highlighted in your post is just as relevant to older editions, if not more so.

St2pid.

[shadzar]

I said you editted it. Format changes are edits. I still don't get what you are trying to ask in relation to those bolded parts, and your question about earlier editions.

Everything he highlighted in your post is just as relevant to older editions, if not more so.

St2pid.

No, they are relevant to asshole players irrelevant of ANY specific game.

They are the assholes there JUST to cause a problem.

This is not special to D&D. Ref v players, all refs are assholes, Jordan is the team...etc, etc, etc.

It is the idiots that blame all DMs because theirs sucked, and try to be the center of attention for any game they are in.

It has NOTHING to do with just 2nd edition. Any disruptive player was removed from my groups. Unlike 3rd edition where that is welcomed for people to destroy the game with interruptions, in 2nd with me, that shit was not allowed. There was a door, and you had feet, so no need to wait for a ride, start walking your ass somewhere else.

So again, what does it have to do specifically with 2nd edition, other than that is what 3tards like to assign to 2nd edition that never played it, and prefer to blame the game rather than bad players?

[Judging__Eagle]

shadazar, did your group kick out players or DMs, and if so, what did they do?

[shadzar]

1- you are on ignore
2- when you learn my name, i will again address your questions. Even if you no speaka da english you can copy and paste.

[Korwin]

1- you are on ignore
2- when you learn my name, i will again address your questions. Even if you no speaka da english you can copy and paste.

If you ignore (I am asuming the ignore funktion of the board) him, how do you know he is spelling your name right?

And didnt you say you ignore all who quoted people on your ignore list?
So since I quoted someone, why arent I on your ignore list?

[koz]

There's an easy 3-step solution to this problem.

1) Shadzar ignores everyone.
2) Everyone ignores shadzar.
3) Everyone goes home happy.

Seriously. It works.

[Roy]

Win. But seriously.

Editions prior to third were the bastions of the DM vs player mindset. It was all over the place in first, and very common in second. Such that I would estimate at least two chapters of the 2nd edition DM book were devoted to ways he could screw over the players for the lulz, ranging from items or other things that look useful but are actually DNS and there is no way to tell the difference without being subjected to that unavoidable Death, No Save, to writing several pages devoted to ripping the PCs off on a horse, to the classic 'Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies'.

The earlier editions were very much competitive, because they were like a game of Paranoia you were actually expected to take seriously. Hell, just the fact some of you were probably far faster than the others made it competitive, because it means when the uber monster came out to eat you even if you didn't outrun it, you outran your friends.

That shit got thrown out in third, and the books actually discourage you from doing that. Then 4th became the MMO edition, so no one fucking cares about it.

Of course, you can see all this for yourself by just watching Shadtard go. Whine and flail Shadtard, whine and flail.