queelez: Rose Lalonde facepalming, with eldritch energy surrounding her (grimpalm)
[personal profile] queelez
Why is Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 so fucking complicated?

Why do I always focus on creating an interesting character, instead of making somebody I can fucking play in the system?

Rokugan is easy. Deadlands is easy. Tales from the Wood is easy.

Fuck you, DnD 3.5


Date: 2011-08-22 03:44 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] doomweasel.livejournal.com
While 3.5 will always be near and dear to my heart, being the first one I played... yeah. It's obscenely complicated for no real reason. That's why I like 4.0.

Date: 2011-08-22 06:26 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] queelez.livejournal.com
For me, the problem is that while systems like Rokugan, Serenity, Deadlands, and whatnot are all built somewhat differently, they're all more or less the same/similar setup: You get your abilities and your advantages, or whatever they're called, from the same pool of points. You get to take so many disadvantages, which gives you extra points.

Dungeons and Dragons had none of that. The feats system just felt really tacked on, I guess. It was only today, in our third session, that I realized that I had done my skills wrong.

Date: 2011-08-24 02:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] doomweasel.livejournal.com
Haha, that's funny that you feel that way, considering the DnD mechanic is considered the generic RPG system, by virtue of it being the first (and still the most widespread).

Date: 2011-08-22 04:49 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tolone.livejournal.com
I like how 3.5 is complex in that you can make your character as awesome or as crappy as you want. I have never failed to make a piss-terrible bisexual alcoholic Dragonkin Sorcerer/Fighter and subsequently fail each and every roll I make ever, but that doesn't mean it's not fun and ridiculous.

PS tell your DM to run puzzle campaigns as well as combat campaigns, there are some tales that are solely comprised of skill checks and treasure hunting, and even a few (if they're written well) that just have your characters chasing a mystery and solving riddles on a time limit.

Date: 2011-08-22 08:28 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] angahith.livejournal.com
Haha, yeah, shit seems complicated. As you know, I started playing in my first d20 game ever, yesterday. And it's 3.5e. XD

A friend of mine, who DMs a lot, says Pathfinder is the way to go, though. It's 3.5e but less retarded (according to him)

Date: 2011-08-22 10:23 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] donraj.livejournal.com
I'd say that's only marginally true. Pathfinder is more streamlined, but they didn't change it that much. They couldn't if they wanted to keep it backwards compatible.

Date: 2011-08-23 12:58 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] harpsi-fizz.livejournal.com
RPG should be about RPing, not about a formula. GODDOMOT FRONK.

Date: 2011-08-24 02:25 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] corsaired.livejournal.com

Date: 2011-08-26 12:44 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anniefelis.livejournal.com
DnD is more or less for gamers, not roleplayers. You can't get too attached to your characters when you know that the GM will probably kill them off at some point.

I gave up on DnD because it's way too complex and involves way too much memorization, even if there were a lot of fun things about it. The game needs cliff notes or something, or I need to play with people who don't spend long hours memorizing things religiously.


queelez: A series of blue gears against a white background (Default)

June 2017


Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 26th, 2017 03:35 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios