Intuitive Rules - 2nd Ed. AD&D vs. D&D 3E/3.5

[Lancer]

3rd edition was the best thng that could happen to DnD.

 

And if the old codgers who are fixated on Thac0 don't like it... tough  (w00t)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I have first hand experience with Basic D&D, 2ndEd, and 3e.

 

Darque, you don't even game. You just read the books. What are you talking about? lol

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't "game" currently.. that doesn't mean I haven't in the past on occasion.

 

Or did you think I started collecting pnp books just for fun?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Fair enough. But have you actually GM/played at least several sessions of both 3e and 2ndEd? Preferably under the same GM or group of people?

[Diamond]

If you have trouble counting down or subtracting single digit numbers, I can't help you there. Besides I can easily say the same thing that the only reason why you find a 3e CRPG easier than a 2ndEd one is because you are used to the fact that in most other console/PC RPGs ACs go up as they get better not down. Is it that surprising that you would find counting up more intuitive?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I must say here that AC in 2nd Ed was extremely counter-intuitive. In real life most things get better when they go up, why should game ruleset be the other way around?

[Diamond]

Not one person I have ever explained BG2 or PS:T to has ever NOT said "That seems dumb" when explaining that better armor decreases your armor class and bonuses to your weapons decrease your THAC0.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I am actually one of them.

[alanschu]

Pretty bad when the basic AD&D rules aren't as simple.

 

If you have trouble counting down or subtracting single digit numbers, I can't help you there. Besides I can easily say the same thing that the only reason why you find a 3e CRPG easier than a 2ndEd one is because you are used to the fact that in most other console/PC RPGs ACs go up as they get better not down. Is it that surprising that you would find counting up more intuitive?

With that said, it is still a trivial matter to convert AC in 2ndEd to 3e style (just subtract from 20)so that you can count up or forego THACO completely if that is your wish.

 

 

 

Here's the point that YOU JUST AREN'T GETTING. Of course YOU have no problems with it now. You've already played it for so long.

 

Stating that the 2nd edition rules are intuitive is akin to saying Hitler was a benevolent pacifist. It does not matter whether you think it's better or not.

 

And of course you wouldn't have problems learning SPECIAL. It's an intuitive (i.e. Increasing something makes it better...OMG what a concept!) system.

 

 

I'm talking about getting my friends, that have zero D&D knowledge, to play the game.  It's not much of a stretch that people that played tons of AD&D found a game based around AD&D more intuitive.  Which is exactly what I tried to highlight in an earlier post.

 

This is exactly what WotC claimed.. Almost certainly a marketing strategy to get more sales. I have yet to see the statistics.

 

Get some people that don't know it and teach them the games! It's what I did!

 

Also, I was under the impression that we were talking about CRPG games.  I've exceptionally little experience in either game, PnP, because they don't particularly interest me.

 

 

Then you are not a valid authority to talk to me about rule systems. Don't talk about something you know nothing about. If you are not familiar with them then you are wasting your time.. as well as mine's.

 

Finally, you are basing your knowledge of rule systems and their "intuitiveness" based on certain cRPGS you played which aren't the best resource.

 

I'm basing my statements on the CRPGs which have utilized the rule systems. Go ahead and be all elitist. You're just crying because an unintuitive ruleset that you prefer isn't the default ruleset anymore.

 

 

They are not the best resource because believe it or not how intuitive a game feels need not be necessarily related to the ruleset in question but the capabilities of the programmer in making a user-friendly interface. Since these cRPGS are ultimately based on PnP rulesets, the PnP rulesets themselves are the final authority. Until you actually get the PHB and DMG for each edition and read them through (at the very least or even better play a few PnP sessions for both) you can't have an unbiased and informed opinion on the matter.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

All moot, when we're discussing CRPG games.

 

 

And even though I don't actively play in PnP games, it doesn't take much to see which one has the basics that aren't contradictory to basic human interpretation. Seriously, go down the street and ask people at random. Ask them "This item has an armor rating of 4, and this item has an armor rating of 3. Which one is considered better armor?" Then come back here so I can call BS when you state that anything other than an exceptional minority (if any) say that an armor rating of 3 is better than an armor rating of 4.

 

 

You CANNOT win this.

[Llyranor]

Or can he?

[Gabrielle]

Looks like Game Over.

 

Dirtnap time.

[alanschu]

Or can he?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Only if he can find a civilization that naturally makes an association that increasing something is actually decreases it.

[Lancer]

I must say here that AC in 2nd Ed was extremely counter-intuitive. In real life most things get better when they go up, why should game ruleset be the other way around?

Now we are getting into philosophy.. lol

 

This is all relative to your own personal experiences....

 

People who have only been exposed to non-AD&D computer and japanese-style RPGs and never played tabletop AD&D will have trouble understanding 2ndEd THACO and AC for the first time. To those people it will seem counter-intuitive. You seem to fall here.

 

OTOH, people who have played AD&D PnP and/or have played a couple of AD&D computer RPGs (Gold Box etc..) will find THACO and AC very intuitive concepts. I fall in this category.

 

What I am trying to say here is that what you deem as counter-intuitive is highly dependent on your personal experiences. But I don't think there is anything INNATELY intuitive about things getting better as they go up. I don't think things HAVE to go up to be better. When crime rates go up, is that better too?

 

 

Ok.. Let's put the intuitiveness of 3e to the test. Just a couple of simple ones:

 

 

1) Explain to me what is so intuitive about the concept of attack of opportunity in say, ToEE?

2) Explain how dodge bunuses stacking and deflection bonuses not stacking is intuitive?

 

Waiting......

Edited January 14, 2006 by Lancer

[Diamond]

1) Explain to me what is so intuitive about the concept of attack of opportunity in say, ToEE?

And what is not intuitive about that concept? When a combatant in a melee lets her guard down, opponents nearby can take immediate advantage to make one attack for free.

 

2) Explain how dodge bunuses stacking and deflection bonuses not stacking is intuitive?

Dodge is speed, deflection is using one item to deflect an attack, you can't deflect one attack with more than one item, hence end up using the best item.

 

 

Now you tell me how is that less intuitive than inverted armor class in 2nd Ed.

[Darque]

3rd edition was the best thng that could happen to DnD.

 

And if the old codgers who are fixated on Thac0 don't like it... tough  (w00t)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I have first hand experience with Basic D&D, 2ndEd, and 3e.

 

Darque, you don't even game. You just read the books. What are you talking about? lol

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't "game" currently.. that doesn't mean I haven't in the past on occasion.

 

Or did you think I started collecting pnp books just for fun?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Fair enough. But have you actually GM/played at least several sessions of both 3e and 2ndEd? Preferably under the same GM or group of people?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Under the same? No.

 

I came from a "group" that tried a different game ever weekend or so... which is probably the only reason I've experience with so many systems (and why I've grown to collect them. <_< )

 

I'm afraid I don't have "omglolerz I've had the same character for a decade" style experience

 

But I still have experience (and if we want to get technical, I've played more second edition than third... even tried first once... but I still prefer third. It's more user friendly... the powerlevel drop sucks... oh how I loved dual classing.. but it is more user friendly )

[Judge Hades]

I have an easier time teaching a newbie 3.x edition/d20 System than teaching a newbie 2e. Most people I have dealt with feels that d20 System is indeed more intuitive and they had no previous exposure to either editions before.

[Lancer]

And what is not intuitive about that concept? When a combatant in a melee lets her guard down, opponents nearby can take immediate advantage to make one attack for free.

 

So does AoO apply only in melee?

 

How about spellcasting rules? How does it work there? How does AoO work due to creature sizes and across different character classes/levels? How about turning undead? How does AoO vary according to drinking a potion, taking a free action..etc...

And there are many, many more complications due to this one concept.

 

See what I mean? How is learning how to count down possibly harder than this?

 

And this is just from the top of my head. Been a while since I looked at 3e rules.

[Lancer]

I have an easier time teaching a newbie 3.x edition/d20 System than teaching a newbie 2e.  Most people I have dealt with feels that d20 System is indeed more intuitive and they had no previous exposure to either editions before.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Oh yeah? Which edition did you teach them first? Likely, that the second one you teach them will be easier to learn for them than whatever they learned first.

 

And Wow.. They understood the intricacies of AoO right off the bat. I am impressed! Your players must be geniuses!

Edited January 14, 2006 by Lancer

[Darque]

Reducing your AC is counter intuitive...

 

I get +5 to my Armor Class from this ring, yet my AC drops 5 points?

 

*Note: Years of playing BG, Dark sun games and trying PS:T have made Thac0 easy to grasp.. but it's still not intuitive.

[Lancer]

Reducing your AC is counter intuitive...

 

I get +5 to my Armor Class from this ring, yet my AC drops 5 points?

 

*Note: Years of playing BG, Dark sun games and trying PS:T have made Thac0 easy to grasp.. but it's still not intuitive.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

It's something that you will find weird at first but there is no science about it. There is no studying a billion rules to understand how reducing AC works (unlike AoO). Once you see one example of it, you know when you see another +? bonus to the AC, that means drop AC by that many points. And it is always like that. 100% of the time. The rules for AC reduction don't change under different circumstances like AoO does.

[Darque]

Let's see...

 

Thac0: +'s are really -'s

 

wtf

 

AoO: You let your guard down, and something will take that opening to kick your ass.

 

Well that makes sense

[Judge Hades]

I have an easier time teaching a newbie 3.x edition/d20 System than teaching a newbie 2e.  Most people I have dealt with feels that d20 System is indeed more intuitive and they had no previous exposure to either editions before.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Oh yeah? Which edition did you teach them first? Likely, that the second one you teach them will be easier to learn for them than whatever they learned first.

 

And Wow.. They understood the intricacies of AoO right off the bat. I am impressed! Your players must be geniuses!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Actually I was comparing newbies to gaming period. I taught a bunch of people 2e and a different set of people with no experience with the d20 System. The d20 System crowd gets it a lot quicker than the 2e crowd.

[Lancer]

Let's see...

 

Thac0: +'s are really -'s

 

wtf

 

AoO: You let your guard down, and something will take that opening to kick your ass.

 

Well that makes sense 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

It's weird.. When I learned to play Basic D&D and later AD&D when I was 12-13, I never questioned these things. I just learned them because that is how the rulebook said that they worked. And I thought that addition/subtraction of single digits is simple enough and so they quickly became intuitive. Whether you are counting up or down really makes no difference to me. They are both easy to grasp.

It is not like you are adding fractions like in Champions, for instance!

 

I never thought THACO and AC were difficult concepts. In fact, what I thought was the hardest thing to learn from Basic D&D was the War Machine rules. That took a little.

AoO, OTOH, is easily the hardest roleplaying concept I have ever had to plod through. And this is coming from someone who has read through the rulesets of sh!tloads (pardon my French) of games. There is a LOOT more to AoO than what you state here.

Edited January 14, 2006 by Lancer

[Volourn]

"But if anyone claims that they made perfect sense out of all this their first time looking at AD&D rules, I say they are lying."

 

Then call me a liar.. again. I found it rather intuitive. And, I was about 14 or so when 2E came out. And, none of my friends had any real trouble figuring it out.

 

 

 

"In real life most things get better when they go up, why should game ruleset be the other way around?"

 

Most things. Not everything. And, the D&D ruleset works the same.

Edited January 14, 2006 by Volourn

[Lancer]

Then call me a liar.. again. I found it rather intuitive. And, I was about 14 or so when 2E came out. And, none of my friends had any real trouble figuring it out.

 

Finally! A breath of fresh air!

 

I concur with this. I had the same experience. I find it surprising that the 3e advocates claim that 2ndED was so hard to learn for them. I didn't have any problems understanding it either and nor did any of my friends that I gamed with.

[Volourn]

And, before someone accuses me of being anti 3E, wrong again. I wa sin the past. But, overall, I like it just as much as 2E and in some ways it is better.

 

So there. "

 

But, I've never un=dertsood this nonsense of thaco and negative ac being some overly complicated difficult thing to figure out. It's VERY intuitive.

 

The lower the ac or the lower the thaco the better they are.

 

NOt complicated at all.

 

Just the way calories work.

 

Or the faster you go the more likley you'll get in toruble with the law making it a bad thing. LOL

 

Same with PING for internet connections for multiplayer games. The lower the better.

 

R00fles!

[CoM_Solaufein]

Call me one who doesn't like change, because it's true, but 2nd edition rules are great compared to 3.5 or whatever version it's at now. I don't like them, they removed too many restrictions on classes and races. I don't like how it levels up either.

[Musopticon?]

Sigh.

 

Does anyone of you even understand what "intuitive" means?

 

Nevermind. my biggest gripe with 2nd edition was the restrictions. Why the heck couldn't a halfling be a paladin? They have individuals of strong faith in their temples for, say, Baervan and using weapons have never been a problem for the periannnath. So what's the ****ing problem?

 

Same goes for the whole "druids can't use metal weapons"-bull****. Or the priest ethos not allowing for bladed weapons. Helmite paladins wielded zweihanders and half-spears, why not the priests?

Edited January 14, 2006 by Musopticon?

[Gabrielle]

First edition for the win!

 

I like a combination of both second edition and third. It's stupid that priests and druids can't use certain weapons. It's also stupid to have race restrictions removed from second edition. A dwarf monk in third edition? Please let's be realistic about it.

Edited January 14, 2006 by Gabrielle

[Nartwak]

It's also stupid have race restriction removed. A dwarf monk? Please let's be realistic about it. .

I'm sorry, but this is unintelligible.