The reason why fighters will never have nice things.

[Archmage]

Further I hear the saying "advances the plot" in any meaningful way and I am a bit curious as to what exactly that means.

I think Lago and potentially others have a specific notion in mind when this is said. It's not just "advances the plot," it's "advances the plot without DM fiat."

So the idea is that PCs encounter Problem X and that they solve it, start to finish, entirely by use of class features and hard-coded abilities inherent to the characters. If at any point the DM has to say "and you conveniently find pegasus mounts" or "the king loans you a magic ring so you can teleport and communicate with him while on your mission" in order for you to complete the adventure, your character obviously isn't up to the task of doing the job without outside assistance--and is therefore inadequate.

If you need to get to the Flying Sky Fortress and on your character sheet it says you get a flying mount at level 5 for free and forever, it's all golden. But if you have to ask the DM if flying ponies are for sale at the Magic Kingdom, you've failed to carry your weight on that particular adventure because the DM might say no--leaving your character stranded while characters who have inherent access to flight go fight the bad guys.

[shadzar]

Basically, stop trying to play the game to where it cannot lead. If AO if the most powerful being, then what do you do when you defeat him in battle? Where does your character have to go then, no matter what class he is?

Ask me this again when my character defeats him (note, that as he is an asshole who helps to keep the world in the state that ensures it will forever torn apart by strife caused by actively malicious supernatural powers, his face likely indeed needs stabbing if one seriously wants to change the Realms).

Hasnt the Realms been fucked with enough lately? Spellplague, Lost-Abeir, all this other shit?

Not saying anything about the Realms itself per say...just using a well known highest level being as a point to say...you dont need to fight everything to play the game...killing the toughest "thing" in the game doesnt mean you "win" the game.

[Darth Rabbitt]

Basically, stop trying to play the game to where it cannot lead. If AO if the most powerful being, then what do you do when you defeat him in battle? Where does your character have to go then, no matter what class he is?

Learn to let go and play a new damn character. Try a high level no-magic game..or rather a game like an SSI gold box game where healing was done by NPC clerics.

You could retire your character after killing Ao.

You will have to explain what is funny for that comic, already on another dose of medicine and my funny went to sleep already form it....

The funny thing is that you're defending racial level limits, one of the stupidest ideas to ever come from D&D.

the problem is you have to get TO Ao to fight him...and everything in the game isnt there to be fought.

Getting to Ao and fighting him sounds like an excellent adventure to me.

And then, you can retire your character and know that you ended their career in a really cool way.

James Wyatt or whoever really fucked up trying to over simplify and generalize the game to the Munchkin Card Game ideology of "killing stuff and taking its loot".

that isnt what D&D is about. Even earlier you get XP for more than just "killing".

Multiply the XP value by the number of monsters defeated

Chapter 10: Experience
Experience From Role-Playing
Experience From Achieving Goals
Experience From Monsters
Experience From Treasure
Experience From Exceptional Actions

The Red Box is disproving your own statement there, as it's essentially just saying "more XP for killing more monsters."

And the Rules Cyclopedia (1991) came out years after Red Box (1983), so if anything, it's a new idea to award XP for things other than killing things.

But the most important thing is that I never said that the only point of D&D is killing things, just that gods should be an appropriate challenge for high-level characters.

WotC changed the game to confuse enough people to not understand it and then proceeded to not understand it themselves....guess that comes form the 2 morons still sticking around after all these years worth of lay-offs that tried making their own rip-off of D&D cause they didnt understand it well enough being the ones in charge (Bill Slavesik, Richard Baker...Alternity....)

The more i think about it the problems of WotC D&D is that it isnt D&D....but fantasy rather than space based Alternity thanks to those two....

they tried to change the game...their new game sucked...so they spread the suck when they got to power and ruined it and confused everyone.

Are you really saying that 3.x was MORE confusing than previous editions?

And you're No True Scotsmanning D&D now?

That aside, if judged by the number of people who played, and enjoyed playing, 3.x is by far the best edition of D&D ever published.

is it still player in-fighting that is bringing about the fighter shtick? one player wants to play a fighter and cant do as well at higher levels while his buddy is doing great playing a wizard?

again.. know when to retire your character or the whole group and get a new one. start a new adventure. play the same one with a new DM to see what things change with a slightly different style.

So you're saying that "fighter" should come with an expiration date?

That's not necessarily a bad idea (one I've even heard interesting propositions for), as long as you allow fighters to then multiclass into something that IS balanced with other characters of that level, but if you're seriously advocating the existence of an inferior fighter class existing after it becomes obsolete relative to the other characters, then that is really stupid.

[shadzar]

i said James Wyatt or whoever was responsible for saying D&D was jsut about killing things, not you...just quoting you happened and the htough occured when replying to you.

defeating, not killing in the red box...says so right there. just didnt dig far for more while the RC had it all in the TOC.

RC just compiled D&D to sell it in one book while 2nd AD&D was being sold...it wasnt anything new, jsut the old red/blue/etc compiled into one place.

ALL classes should come with expiration dates. simply put the game isnt meant to be played hard and fast and last long.

some people have games that have ben going on for a decade and still not double digit levels.

people today think that you have to level within...what did 3rd and 4th say....every 10 encounters...or you are doing something wrong.

3rd and 4th are about level grinding and for video gamers/min-maxers. but they think outside the computer that everything should translate the same as the computer games.....it dont.

the game wasnt meant...as someone else said...to be played from level 1 to level 30 or more...

pick a subset of levels and play them...sadly i congrats 4th for naming them in a way to get my point across enough...the tiers... heroic, epic, and whatever.

pick an area to play in and play it, then move on.

take how people i knew used to play...

you didnt sit with one character and play out ann entire world like Gary, Dave, Frank, et all. you made a character for the adventure you were playing. you played it through that adventure, and MAYBE another one later...not everytime you sat down to play. you would make MANY characters through playing to try new things.

im dizzy and lost my train of thought...will try to find it again later and edit back into here...

[Echoes]

3rd and 4th are about level grinding and for video gamers/min-maxers. but they think outside the computer that everything should translate the same as the computer games.....it dont.

1st & 2nd edition are all about gygaxian antagonistic DMing and grognard in-jokes, then . Go fuck yourself and your broad strokes with a rusty chainsaw.

Slightly less flippantly, the game has changed over the 2+ decades it's been around. You apparently don't like that. Thankfully you still have all those old books and you can go on playing your favorite edition and don't have to care about the rest of it. Seriously, did Wizards come to your home and force you to switch to a new edition? Did they forcibly repossess all your old books and make you buy the new ones? Stop telling other people they're doing it wrong because they aren't playing your preferred edition.

Maybe I want to play the same character over a long period, to explore where I can take that character, what kind of development he might have. Of course, according to you I'm just a level-grinding video game munchkin who wouldn't understand what real roleplaying was about.

Moreover, why the fuck do you care what other people, who you obviously wouldn't play with, want to do? Seriously, where the fuck do you get off telling other people they're wrong because they want to storm Olympus or whatever?

What are you, the ur-grognard? Get over your edition war hard-on.

[shadzar]

Maybe I want to play the same character over a long period, to explore where I can take that character, what kind of development he might have.

what does that have to do with what level the character is? you arent talking about character development when you involve a level. you are talking about a character build as 3rd created the term.

Moreover, why the fuck do you care what other people, who you obviously wouldn't play with, want to do? Seriously, where the fuck do you get off telling other people they're wrong because they want to storm Olympus or whatever?

none of the games are made to make it work...i dont care what 4th edition claims...it does not work to play a character from 1st to the highest level. not even starting a group and playing the same characters...should they live...through every possible level. no editions support this method of play...

what i care about is seeing people make mistakes...if your idea of character development is that which includes levels in any way, then you are falling into a trap. there is nothing really to develop there as the game already has the levels and what are gained at them spelled out for you.

either retire your character, stop bitching cause you think that every class should be the same at every level and should level at the same rate and offer the same at every level and keep playing for the fun, or find a new game that offers what you want.

still the only problem with the game is when people play with the numbers and try to play the numbers rather than the game.

Bob the Fighter: Boo-hoo me, Willie the Wizard is doing more damage in combat now so i feel useless cause i dont get to kill things anymore.

again the game wasnt meant to be played liked that trough all levels. get over yourself. get over thinking the classes in some way need to be equal in D&D cause it wasnt made that way, and either play D&D, or find another game that supports what you want.

character development doesnt come from killing 100 more monsters or gaining 2 new levels. you may not mean that by wanting to develop the character more...but sadly many do. you can develop the character more without having to be the center of attention during combat at later levels.

2011-1974=37 try nearly 4 decades the game has been around.

and to be an ass back about the why do you care...why did who didnt like it the way TSR made it have a need to come fuck with it just so you could say you were playing D&D in the first place? why didnt you go play your own game rather than fuck with something you didnt like just to ruin it for other who did like it the way it was?

also note...i am not the one saying 4th edition breaks down after 10th level...go read ENWorld when it finished its hardware move yourself, and was also not the one saying 3rd edition was fucked with its fighters either.

i am just saying that the way people thought the game would work isnt how it was made, and maybe, JUST MAYBE...they should learn the game for once WHATEVER edition they are playing and realize what it was made for rather than trying to think it was made for them as God's gift to gaming and everything is made for them since the bastardization 3rd created of gaming and the "empower the players" as if they had no power before.

[PoliteNewb]

What are you, the ur-grognard?

That's a remarkably astute observation.

[Krakatoa]

Seriously, I'm new here, but I think it goes without saying:

Shadzar, chill: it's just an elfgame.

[Gnosticism Is A Hoot]

Maybe I want to play the same character over a long period, to explore where I can take that character, what kind of development he might have.

what does that have to do with what level the character is? you arent talking about character development when you involve a level. you are talking about a character build as 3rd created the term.

Moreover, why the fuck do you care what other people, who you obviously wouldn't play with, want to do? Seriously, where the fuck do you get off telling other people they're wrong because they want to storm Olympus or whatever?

none of the games are made to make it work...i dont care what 4th edition claims...it does not work to play a character from 1st to the highest level. not even starting a group and playing the same characters...should they live...through every possible level. no editions support this method of play...

what i care about is seeing people make mistakes...if your idea of character development is that which includes levels in any way, then you are falling into a trap. there is nothing really to develop there as the game already has the levels and what are gained at them spelled out for you.

either retire your character, stop bitching cause you think that every class should be the same at every level and should level at the same rate and offer the same at every level and keep playing for the fun, or find a new game that offers what you want.

still the only problem with the game is when people play with the numbers and try to play the numbers rather than the game.

Bob the Fighter: Boo-hoo me, Willie the Wizard is doing more damage in combat now so i feel useless cause i dont get to kill things anymore.

again the game wasnt meant to be played liked that trough all levels. get over yourself. get over thinking the classes in some way need to be equal in D&D cause it wasnt made that way, and either play D&D, or find another game that supports what you want.

character development doesnt come from killing 100 more monsters or gaining 2 new levels. you may not mean that by wanting to develop the character more...but sadly many do. you can develop the character more without having to be the center of attention during combat at later levels.

2011-1974=37 try nearly 4 decades the game has been around.

and to be an ass back about the why do you care...why did who didnt like it the way TSR made it have a need to come fuck with it just so you could say you were playing D&D in the first place? why didnt you go play your own game rather than fuck with something you didnt like just to ruin it for other who did like it the way it was?

also note...i am not the one saying 4th edition breaks down after 10th level...go read ENWorld when it finished its hardware move yourself, and was also not the one saying 3rd edition was fucked with its fighters either.

i am just saying that the way people thought the game would work isnt how it was made, and maybe, JUST MAYBE...they should learn the game for once WHATEVER edition they are playing and realize what it was made for rather than trying to think it was made for them as God's gift to gaming and everything is made for them since the bastardization 3rd created of gaming and the "empower the players" as if they had no power before.

I honestly don't know whether to laugh or cry.

[MGuy]

Further I hear the saying "advances the plot" in any meaningful way and I am a bit curious as to what exactly that means.

I think Lago and potentially others have a specific notion in mind when this is said. It's not just "advances the plot," it's "advances the plot without DM fiat."

So the idea is that PCs encounter Problem X and that they solve it, start to finish, entirely by use of class features and hard-coded abilities inherent to the characters. If at any point the DM has to say "and you conveniently find pegasus mounts" or "the king loans you a magic ring so you can teleport and communicate with him while on your mission" in order for you to complete the adventure, your character obviously isn't up to the task of doing the job without outside assistance--and is therefore inadequate.

If you need to get to the Flying Sky Fortress and on your character sheet it says you get a flying mount at level 5 for free and forever, it's all golden. But if you have to ask the DM if flying ponies are for sale at the Magic Kingdom, you've failed to carry your weight on that particular adventure because the DM might say no--leaving your character stranded while characters who have inherent access to flight go fight the bad guys.

Makes sense to me.

[Echoes]

Maybe I want to play the same character over a long period, to explore where I can take that character, what kind of development he might have.

what does that have to do with what level the character is? you arent talking about character development when you involve a level. you are talking about a character build as 3rd created the term.

Lolwut? Because I want to explore the game world, and that includes things you can't do as a farmboy or a wet-behind-the-ears student?

Moreover, why the fuck do you care what other people, who you obviously wouldn't play with, want to do? Seriously, where the fuck do you get off telling other people they're wrong because they want to storm Olympus or whatever?

none of the games are made to make it work...i dont care what 4th edition claims...it does not work to play a character from 1st to the highest level. not even starting a group and playing the same characters...should they live...through every possible level. no editions support this method of play...

And ... that answers the question how, exactly? Why the fuck do you care what I, or anybody else, do in our games? How does it affect you in any way that we're "doing it wrong"?

what i care about is seeing people make mistakes...if your idea of character development is that which includes levels in any way, then you are falling into a trap. there is nothing really to develop there as the game already has the levels and what are gained at them spelled out for you.

Oh, so if I want to improve my skills and abilities in order to have new and innovative experiences with a character, I'm doing it wrong? What. The. Fuck!? Seriously, your argument is that because I know what the mechanics are I can't possibly have any new or unexpected adventures with those tools? Wow, you're even more of a mouth-breathing fuckwit than I thought.

either retire your character, stop bitching cause you think that every class should be the same at every level and should level at the same rate and offer the same at every level and keep playing for the fun, or find a new game that offers what you want.

Err, you want to point out where I said any of what you're going on about? Where did I bitch about classes, or anything? The only thing I responded to was you being an arrogant mouth-breathing grognard telling other people they're doing it wrong because they have the audacity to play and enjoy a different edition of the game than you.

still the only problem with the game is when people play with the numbers and try to play the numbers rather than the game.

Bob the Fighter: Boo-hoo me, Willie the Wizard is doing more damage in combat now so i feel useless cause i dont get to kill things anymore.

again the game wasnt meant to be played liked that trough all levels. get over yourself. get over thinking the classes in some way need to be equal in D&D cause it wasnt made that way, and either play D&D, or find another game that supports what you want.

Wow. You're telling me to get over myself? Shut the fuck up. I don't give a flying fuck how shit used to be. Moreover, why the fuck do you care? If you don't like the edition, don't fucking play. Seriously, you can just keep playing with the old edition. No one else is going to fucking care; why do you?

character development doesnt come from killing 100 more monsters or gaining 2 new levels. you may not mean that by wanting to develop the character more...but sadly many do. you can develop the character more without having to be the center of attention during combat at later levels.

Fuck you and your one-true-way bullshit. Guess what, there are many ways to play, and you don't have a monopoly on fun.

2011-1974=37 try nearly 4 decades the game has been around.

You do know that "+" means "or more", right?

and to be an ass back about the why do you care...why did who didnt like it the way TSR made it have a need to come fuck with it just so you could say you were playing D&D in the first place? why didnt you go play your own game rather than fuck with something you didnt like just to ruin it for other who did like it the way it was?

What? Seriously, what the fuck does all of that even mean? I mean, the words are English, but ... are you seriously accusing me of making WotC acquire the D&D license and release 3rd/4th Edition? Are you crazy and/or on drugs (or not, if you should be?) or something, because this is some seriously schizophrenic shit.

also note...i am not the one saying 4th edition breaks down after 10th level...go read ENWorld when it finished its hardware move yourself, and was also not the one saying 3rd edition was fucked with its fighters either.

i am just saying that the way people thought the game would work isnt how it was made, and maybe, JUST MAYBE...they should learn the game for once WHATEVER edition they are playing and realize what it was made for rather than trying to think it was made for them as God's gift to gaming and everything is made for them since the bastardization 3rd created of gaming and the "empower the players" as if they had no power before.

Ok, so really it all boils down to this. You have a raging hate-on for 3.x and you feel that the edition existing is the personal responsibility of everyone who likes it.

So, yeah, apparently I was right. You are the ur-grognard. It's like crazy Soviet scientists distilled down all that is grognardom and through wacky mad science brought it to shambling life. I sincerely hope you just get super-obsessed over the internet. Because the alternative is that you are like this in real life, and that thought actually makes my head hurt trying to imagine it.

I honestly don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Honestly, I hope he's a troll. Because then I could laugh at the patheticness of putting that much effort into trolling a bunch of D&D geeks.

[Echoes]

Seriously, I'm new here, but I think it goes without saying:

Shadzar, chill: it's just an elfgame.

Ah, but grognards hate elves.

[TOZ]

Holy fuck, when did shad show back up?

[Kaelik]

Honestly, I hope he's a troll. Because then I could laugh at the patheticness of putting that much effort into trolling a bunch of D&D geeks.

Bad news. He's sincerely that stupid. Put him on ignore, and get this over with.

There is a heirarchy of shittiest posters to ever post on TGD, and make everyone else ignore them. From shittiest to least shitty it goes:

[The Great Fence Builder Speaks]
Kaelik's Shitiness Hierarchy has been edited out.
[/TGFBS]

[For Valor]

darn... I really want to know what that was...

[Darth Rabbitt]

So do I, so do I.

[TheWorid]

Curses, I showed up too late for the hate.

[tussock]

Just some friendly history.

OD&D was first 1 XP for 1 gp and more for monsters (100XP per monster "level"), and quickly changed to be almost all gold (~12 XP for an Orc by 1975). XP was added for finding magic items that you kept later on. That stabilised in AD&D, with lots of rules added to steal away the gps.

Basic (by '83) was supposed to be similar for monsters+treasure, but an equal amount added for all potential kills and finds after completing the plot, no matter how much you really killed. Full of options by the time they made the Compendium.

2e took away the XP per gp for all but Rogues in '89, reduced monster XP a bit, but replaced some of that with a small total HD killed bonus for fighters, and spells cast or research done for Wizards and Clerics, and piddly amounts for plot completion.
You basically had to hunt for the special high-XP monsters to kill, because it took 100 Orcs each to make level 2, and getting to name level was a total bitch. Players did rather appreciate any odd XP awards though, because it was hard to get.

3e changed to all monsters, all the time (no one uses the rather vague options), and much higher XP awards and flatter level curve. 100 Orcs each gets you to level 5. 4e sticks with that, plus 10% plot, and a shitty non-combat challenge system that you'd get more XP for failing and have to sword some more things instead.


And level limits were originally to let elves be *better* than humans without them logically taking over the world in the background. The limit was always intended to be outside where you'd want to play, so eventually hitting ~16th level for thematically appropriate classes.

[shadzar]

Just some friendly history.

Sadly many ignore that history...but what you present is why i said James Wyatt claimed D&D was jsut about killing monsters and taking their stuff, because that is what he made it...i think his was the name of the project lead for 3rd....so many idiots screwing things up it is hard to keep track of which one did what part to screw D&D up.

i guess a question someone might ask then in regards if they actually listened to your history lesson might be...how does a fighter do anything if not killing monsters? when they start asking that question they will become better players beyond what 3rd edition tried to oversimplify the game to be.

very well put
_________________
if people are wanting to just kill things, then a game needs to be found with that purpose. one that the game supports that...fantasy where magic rules isnt going to let mere mortal actions win in the end without LOTS of luck

even sci-fi a stick wont beat a lasgun

[Parthenon]

Just some friendly history.

Sadly many ignore that history...but what you present is why i said James Wyatt claimed D&D was jsut about killing monsters and taking their stuff, because that is what he made it...

What? What tussock just said is that D&D was originally all about killing monsters and taking their gold.

OD&D was first 1 XP for 1 gp and more for monsters (100XP per monster "level"), and quickly changed to be almost all gold (~12 XP for an Orc by 1975).

D&D was all about killing monsters and taking their gold.

XP was added for finding magic items that you kept later on. That stabilised in AD&D, with lots of rules added to steal away the gps.

D&D at this point was all about killing monsters and taking their stuff.

Basic (by '83) was supposed to be similar for monsters+treasure, but an equal amount added for all potential kills and finds after completing the plot, no matter how much you really killed. Full of options by the time they made the Compendium.

D&D at this point was all about killing monsters and taking their stuff, with benefits even if you didn't actually kill them and take their stuff.

2e took away the XP per gp for all but Rogues in '89, reduced monster XP a bit, but replaced some of that with a small total HD killed bonus for fighters, and spells cast or research done for Wizards and Clerics, and piddly amounts for plot completion.

This says that XP for gold was removed, but not XP for magic items, so I can only assume that it was kept in. In which case D&D during 2e was still about killing monsters and taking their stuff.

Seriously, the history you've just said was informative and that we should all read just said that D&D is, and always has been, about killing monsters and taking their stuff. Why do you say that James Wyatt made it so as if it wasn't before?

---

i guess a question someone might ask then in regards if they actually listened to your history lesson might be...how does a fighter do anything if not killing monsters? when they start asking that question they will become better players beyond what 3rd edition tried to oversimplify the game to be.

I listened to that history lesson and it told me that throughout D&D fighters have been all about killing monsters, and little else. And that throughout D&D there has never been an option for fighters to do more than that.

[souran]

Further I hear the saying "advances the plot" in any meaningful way and I am a bit curious as to what exactly that means.

I think Lago and potentially others have a specific notion in mind when this is said. It's not just "advances the plot," it's "advances the plot without DM fiat."

So the idea is that PCs encounter Problem X and that they solve it, start to finish, entirely by use of class features and hard-coded abilities inherent to the characters. If at any point the DM has to say "and you conveniently find pegasus mounts" or "the king loans you a magic ring so you can teleport and communicate with him while on your mission" in order for you to complete the adventure, your character obviously isn't up to the task of doing the job without outside assistance--and is therefore inadequate.

If you need to get to the Flying Sky Fortress and on your character sheet it says you get a flying mount at level 5 for free and forever, it's all golden. But if you have to ask the DM if flying ponies are for sale at the Magic Kingdom, you've failed to carry your weight on that particular adventure because the DM might say no--leaving your character stranded while characters who have inherent access to flight go fight the bad guys.

And this idea is tottally stupid. D&D should not be a soloable game. The game should be designed so that one hero alone dies a horrible death and needs significant help from the DM to accomplish fuckall.

Because D&D classes should not be written in a freaking vaccum. The game should assume that the players are part of a party and that each person is taking a role in that team.

The classes need to assist each other and have lots of actions that are used because they set other players up to do awesome stuff.

So its not a freaking issue that the fighter doesn't have fly, because the wizard can cast fly on the party or the druid can summon pegasi. 2e and 3.5e haste are a good example. Haste is a spell that the wizard uses because it makes the fighter type kick freaking butt. It was a great spell in 2e and it was one the wizard didn't caste on himself.

However in 3.x the wizard/cleric/druid is basically always better off to just buff himself than his compatriots.

The issue is that there is never a thing that the fighter does that the wizard/druid/cleric cannot do better/faster/cheaper. There never comes a point where NOT having a fighter makes the adventure harder. Its just the opposite every person playing a fighter instead of a cleric/druid/wizard is making the adventure harder.

There are actually three issues here. The first is that as Lago has pointed out, the fighter has no options or assets he brings besides his swording. That needs to be different.

Two: Swording stops being effectiving in D&D, and the fighter is a terrible bodyguard with no real way being the front line defender that people think he is because the only tool he has been given is hitting things with a sword. So the fighter, who is supposed to be the combat specilist, has a combat style that goes obsolete. That needs to be different.

Three: The spellcasters in 3.x can do everything. They make every other class totally obsolete because magic is better and perfect. Why have a rogue when detect traps is better in every way. Detect Evil, Detect Lies Charm spells etc all provide ways for spellcasters to say "fuck the skill system, I get the result I want, RIGHT NOW!"

The issue here is that castes just need to be changed so that they are not masters of everything. Magic cannot be as perfect as it is in D&D and still leave a purpose to non casters. Although the casting cost for rituals is a totally fucked up system, their further implimentation is usually pretty good. Most of them are simply ways of subsituting a casting skill for some other skill check or a caster check to get a gradiated benefit instead of the perfect magic of 3.x.


What D&D needs is to chop out half the shit that wizards/clerics/druids/spellcasters can do. It needs to have the god of nerf come in and take a giant dump on the magic system.

If D&D has to get rid of wizards who can instanteously create castles of fire in elemental planes in order to get a game that has a stable progression of

Fight Orc Warlord -> Fight Necromancer -> Fight Necromancer as Lich -> Fight Dragon -> Fight Dragon Lich -> Fight Evil God

where everybody cotnributes to the objectives and feels like part of a team then that would be a huge upgrade to the system.

[shadzar]

I listened to that history lesson and it told me that throughout D&D fighters have been all about killing monsters, and little else. And that throughout D&D there has never been an option for fighters to do more than that.

didnt i already quote OD&D? "monster defeated" tussock concurred.

i cant speak for 3rd and 4th really cause they suck and are worthles, and i dont collect trash.....but again James Wyatt....i will take his word for what they were about since he amde them....

basic, 1st/2nd AD&D....anything BEFORE WotC was levelling through defeating...

i guess kids today need the watered-down look of a streamlined 4th edition with all its suckitude, because they cant afford a simple dictionary and jsut make up what words mean....

DEFEAT....has nothing to do with killing.

tussock on Basic: "no matter how much you really killed." killing doesnt matter.

2nd...the optional XP rules per class did give fighters XP for killing, rogues for loot, wizards for using/creating/researching spells, clerics for choirboys...i dont remember right now.

the point being though is REALLY?!

XP is what the game is all about to you people? XP serves one function...well i think 3rd it did something with making magic items or something...but otherwise only deals with leveling. is that all you think the game is about is level grinding?

seriously you are missing fuck-tons of the game if that is all you are about and should try a video game instead, because they can do level grinding a whole lot better. pick a final fantasy game and you can hear the chocobo tune when a battle starts.

THIS is the reason why the 4th edition roles, have only to do with combat. because the morons Bill Slavesik and Richard Baker and others at WotC are just trying to make a minis game.

Gary didnt give a rat's ass about the theatrics, but he moved away from the heavy minis game attempt of D&D for whatever reason. Even his later systems werent solely based on playing minis games.

Read Gary's novels and they arent all just combat. the game isnt all just combat. so if it isnt all just combat, then it isnt all just killing shit and taking its shit.

when you realize that James Wyatt is a giant fucking retard and his idea of what the game is is wrong, then you might find other things to do in the game.

i had a person who seriously thought the game was just about killing stuff. he always wanted to roll a dice to swing his weapon. he was a big time drama queen. either starting it or watching other people in it. well he came back from the restroom once to find an argument going on and was excited. after a while he wondered what was going on and asked. he hadnt even picked up dice since returning and was focused and listenining intently. when he was told that it was in game argument about what had happened and was about to be done next, he nearly freaked thinking that the only excitement could be in rolling dice to fight shit. he thought nothing of the talking to people could be any fun because he also thought the game was just about killing shit and taking its shit. well he grew up and learned...and he was and i still as dumb as a brick.

i would hope that if a moron like him could learn something, the people here might be able to do lots better. when you figure out there is more to the game than killing shit maybe then wory about why X cant have Y. the game encompasses all possibilities and is what you make of it. if you make it out to be a wargame it will be that and your own way of play will come out.

i seriously think most of the people who think D&D is just about killing stuff needs to just play through Tucker's Kobolds for a while to see how that works for them...

for fucks sake people learn what the game is for. then if you dont like it, dont play it and find something else rather than constantly try to change it for you. or play if, but change the shit you dont like.

Lago's initial fuck-up comes in this statement

"A not-insignificant portion of the playerbase wants fighters to be increasingly weak as time goes on."

it has nothing to do with that. he is presenting a false cause and effect. he claims that fighters are weak because the playerbase wants them to be so at higher levels. this is incorrect.

the fact that magic becomes so much more powerful is what MAKES fighters seem weaker, when in fact fighters continue to progress on the same level as they did...but others progress and change differently.

try playing a no magic game and see if fighter still suffer this "problem", and if somehow fighters dont get "increasingly weak" it is not because the playerbase wants them to be so, but because they are just eclipse by supernatural/metaphysical things within the game.

funny how still people want a simple swingy fighter class and 4th had to provide something but not enough of the lack of powers for new people or younger ones to jsut pick up and play and get a feel for the game rather than having to master the powers system to play.

[Krakatoa]

That's not exactly true, as fighters could theoretically be equipped with skills in 3rd and 4th, that expand their role beyond 'punching bag that hits back'.

None of that to validate shadzar's nuttiness of course.

Edit: Damn it that was a response to Parthenon.

[fectin]

So, what do you get out of DnD that you don't get out of magical tea party?
Seriously, you're praising early DnD for its non-combat options.

[mean_liar]

Teehee. People are talking to shadzar? Isn't that what the Ignore function was made to deal with?

Also, I wanted to see if I'd made Kaelik's list.