Author: Buzz (---.enteract.com)
Date: 02-14-2002 12:25
While it's always nice to see that yet another gamer has been "brought back to the fold" by 3e (something that a lot of d20's detractors like to ignore), I have to say that this column struck me as rather disgenuine, and even a little irresposible.
I write this with no intention of telling you how good or bad D&D is for you, or even if it concerns you. It's just a game. So pause, and consider before posting comments.
I have paused and considered, and nonetheless, even with the caveats you present, the column still comes off as a thinly-veiled negative review of 3e. E.g., "I agree, exciting combat is largely the responsibility of those involved via the use exciting descriptions and heroic actions - but 3E does not inspire you to do so!" This, and a lot of your other comments, seems like the same "pronouncements from on high" I hear from the "enlightened gamer" crowd, i.e., that 3e discourages good roleplaying.
And, well, it's bunk. Does 3e really have more of a "tactical and resource management combat style" than, say, the self-contained wargame that is Advanced Combat in GURPS? More than the boatload of RPGs out there that bother keeping track of hit-points/wounds and have rules that govern movement and position? Does it really bog down in boredom to a greater extent when you are "ignoring the rules" than any other game in which you've whittled combat down to nothing more than "roll to hit; check for damamge" would?
The fact is, you're basically elucidating the standard Gamist vs. Dramatist screed and applying it to the industry's favorite whipping-boy.
What purpose does this column really serve? To prove to the world that you're a "real" gamer, and not one of the great unwashed who play "lesser" games where you acually have to roll dice? "Really, guys, I tried 3e, but I didn't inhale." Honestly, I've seen these kinds of "Why I stopped using [blah]" columns before, in both gaming circles and others, and they always basically amount to "Why I hate [blah]."
If you want to write a playtest review, do it in the Reviews section. If you want to write a useful column, why not focus on the reasons why your group has decided to start using Adventure!, and not why they AREN'T using [blah]. Maybe talk about what goes into such a decision. I mean, that's something every gamer goes through, and it doesn't involve pissing off fans of [blah].
Monte Cook once wrote a column about powergaming, in which he tells of seeing HERO players spending a whole session dealing with story elements and not rolling a single die, and of VTM players whose whole session was one big combat-fest. The point of this is simply that players use all kinds of systems for all kinds of stances. Barring judgment by truly objective game design criteria (which I believe does exist), system choice tends to depend on matters of taste. Grand pronouncements asserting system [blah] can't do [foo] or doesn't encourage [bar] equate to little more than "I don't like it!"
Lastly, as a nitpick, I'd like to point out that your comment about Legolas and his daggers is misguided.
First off, 3e has done a very good job of balancing the various weapons against each other; being able to see this balance invovles looking at more than just how many dice of damage they do. Considering that you were "ignoring all the rules", I can see how you might not have been concerned with much more than this.
Second, citing Legolas is kind of like citing Silver-Age Superman. It's hard to fault a system simply because it may, at first glance, fail to handle characters at extreme ends of the power spectrum. Tolkien's elves are not 3e's elves; the former are practically demigods, the latter are short people with pointed ears and low-light vision. On top of this, Legolas is an exceptional elf. He fights with only two knives because HE ONLY NEEDS TWO KNIVES. In 3e terms, he's most likely an Epic-Level character; in HERO, he's Superheroic. A "normal" or low-level character like Merry would be cave troll dung if he tried the same combat moves. And this doesn't even take into consideration that elven blades seem to cut through just about anything like butter (i.e., are magic items in 3e terms).
The jist here is that 3e does do what you're saying it cannot, you just don't like the way it does it. Which is absolutely fine. But why dwell on the negative?
Anyway, I'm glad that 3e brought you back to the hobby; it did the same for me, and for a lot of other people. In future, I hope to see more columns about what you're doing with the systems that you chose to use, rather than disparagements of the systems that you didn't.
|
|
