Author: Justin Bacon (---.aol.com)
Date: 02-19-2002 22:42
---------------------------
It's a tactical exercise, it's possible to rise above it, and we did in moderation, but it should not be so much hard work. This was with a lot of the tactical stuff stripped out, attacks of opportunity for instance, and playing fast and loose with rounds and movement (ignoring the rules, so why not use something that enforces/supports what you want to do?). 3E combat is interesting, but as a tactical exercise, anything else is just a case of pushing against a strong current (which is where the hard work comes in).
---------------------------
I just don't get it. I hear this complaint laid down against D&D3 again and again and again. And I just don't get it. Since my earliest days in gaming, D&D combat has proven to be the most enjoyable system of combat resolution -- and 3e vastly improves it.
Often I find people who dislike 3e combat -- like yourself -- have stripped out elements of the system. Attacks of opportunity, for example, are great. They are not "tactical stuff". They are a goblin being skewered as he tried to run away; or a PC desperately dodging blows as they race to their friend's side.
Similarly, the ablative HPs have never dragged combat down. They are a way of keeping combat active and fun. Systems in which combat is primarily about two people avoiding being hit until, finally, one of them connects and (probably) disables the other one may be realistic, but they are also mind-numbingly boring. Either they are too lethal for the PCs (which discourages combat); or they are long periods of accomplishing nothing, punctuated by finally accomplishing something. Of course, I prefer football to baseball. YMMV.
Justin Bacon
triad3204@aol.com
|
|
