No need to pretend. It IS a dice-fest. You might have had killseekers in your groups, but mine were a bit deeper than that.
I've used 3 and 3.5E, and I feel confident stating that the entire system is geared toward racking up "kills". That's what the kiddies like, that's what sells books.
Again...................    I applaud WotC for creating a game that is tailored to the younger generation. Personally I don't give a shit WHAT they put out. They will never come up with an even semi-realistic system, which is a turnoff for me. But, to each his own.

X..great avatar

Advice: It's hopeless.

ShaneG.

Xaxaxe wrote:Had Gary Gygax written rules for them, though, they would be considered canonical and would be talked about in revered tones. And, you, Aneoth, would have rolled up at least a dozen of these characters over the years and wouldn't have thought twice about it.

But he didn't write such a concept. And since the idea of "new" here pretty much is equal to "sucks," the concept of a fire-breathing PC is treated with disdain. And had EGG written rules for a dragonborn concept, you'd just switch your mockery over to a concept that he didn't write (the eladrin maybe; I don't know, and it doesn't really matter).

Don't worry; I'll get off your lawn in a second.

I most certainly do not agree that new = sucks either.

I really like Castles and Crusades.
When did that hit the shelves?
I also like some other things that have recently hit the shelves.

Such as: even though I do not have and do not plan to get any 3x books, I also have several of the DCC Modules.
And I plan to use them too.

The Eladrin (Based on the description given by Zen above for me) were called Gold Elves in the past...

I never really had a problem with fire breathing half dragon PC's either.
OK, I admit it seems silly, but still........
What I DO have a problem with is that PC also being a Paladin........
It has to do with the alignments, Faith based spell like abilities (Clerical Paladin, etc), Pantheons, and Dieites.
In the old days, all red dragons were CE in alignemnt... PERIOD.
Only red dragons had fire breath.
The only way to justify a fire breathing half dragon Paladin, is to ignore the PC's red dragon half chaotic Evil alignment.

Paladins are by nature (at least in the older shamefully inadiquate systems) Lawful Good .....  PERIOD.........
No other alignments.
Otherwise they become nothing but fighters and loose all of the Paladins religeous clerical type powers.

Again, I do not have any of the new rules books, So I have no idea how WOTCO gets around all the religeon aspects of a Paladins faith so as to allow him to also be a half red dragon so he can breath fire.

Plaag wrote:Gold Dragons had fire breath as well..check the M&T
Dragonborn are not just fire either, they can choose other breath weapons at the creation of the character.

ShaneG.

okie dokie
well there ya go.

But since they can pick any breath weapon, then can they also choose any alignment for a paladin too?
In other words, a paladin can now be any alignment?

I respect your take on alignment, Aneoth, and I can see where that might cause some problems for you as you evaluate some aspects of That New Edition. It's clearly an important part of the way you play the game, which is cool with me.

But, setting aside all talk of game mechanics for a second, I still don't think the point I was trying to make was addressed: the logic of what is considered to be "accepted" and "not accepted" elements of a fantasy-based game is wildly inconsistent at this place.

An example (work with me on this one; I'm trying to make a point   ):

Let's say, for whatever reason, that Gary Gygax had included rules for creating centaur PCs in the early editions of D&D. What would the result have been? That's pretty easy: everyone here would have spent the last 30 or so years playing centaur PCs and not giving it too much thought, other than the occasional rules-based argument. Centaurs would be canonical ... accepted ... possibly even revered ... by virtually every user here. That is an absolute, rock-solid given.

Now reverse it. Let's take what really happened (no centaur PCs in the '70s), but imagine that The Edition That Causes Cancer introduced them earlier this month. What would the reaction be here? Close your eyes and picture it ...

"That's stupid" ... "that's gay" ... "that's NOT D&D!" ... "centaurs can't be PCs because of [rule X], [rule Y], [rule Z]" ... "I'm going to add a lame feats/skills/multiclassing joke for the 10,000th time and maybe someone will eventually laugh!" ... "typical corporate WotC nonsense" ... "get off my lawn!"

Same concept: a centaur PC. But one is accepted and the other is not. And for one reason only: the first was written 30 years ago; the second is new. It has nothing at all to do with game mechanics or playing styles; it's just blind devotion to the original.

Look around this thread, any thread that touches upon 3e (with the possible exception of the DCC line), or any thread that talks "too much" (whatever that means) about a new or different game system, and see if you can tell me I'm wrong.

Xaxaxe......., et al.

I honestly think that much of the WOTCO bashing has a lot to do with the feeling that WOTCO has and will continue to abandon its former fans of the game.

Eventually all the kids that now, or soon will play 4th Ed, will also be abandoned for their kids and grandkids through some future revised new edition game that WOTCO (or some variation thereof) will produce in that future.

Change happens.
Even as an old codger with set ways and old dusty books that I have on my shelf, I can live with that fact.

However, I do feel that WOTCO does not give a whit about the game or those who play that game.
So long as we, or the younger we's in the case of 4th edition (and one day some future generation of we's) give them money.
It is a corporate thing and really has been for many years.........

However, when GG and his family and friends were creating and then running TSR it was a game to them FIRST and FOREMOST.

I do not for a minute truly think that the Big Cahoonahs at WOTCO/HASBRO are evil.
They are simply bidness folks who produce a product that they HOPE will sell.
Who it sells to is the trick they must figure out, and I think they have figured it out pretty well too.
They are NOT targeting me or folks like me from the old days for a very good reason.
There just aint that many of us left, and those that are left cry for old time D&D.
We mostly do not want half dragon paladins who can breath any type of dragon breath and can be any alignment..... etc, etc., etc.....
Most of the new gamers are YOUNG and so they are targeting that group.
No doubt many old timers, will bone up and buy the new stuff too.
New stuff can be fun and they often have kids that they might wish to teach and play the game with.
No question about it.
I also have no problem with them doing so.
I do NOT in the least feel any sort of abandonment by them or resentment for other older players doing so.
Why would I?
I am not being forced to buy it, or play it.

However, they aint getting my grandkids.
They will be taught to play Fantasy RPG's using either OD&D/AD&D, or Castles and Crusades.

I really like Castles and Crusades.
When did that hit the shelves?

Thanks (glad you do,) and 4 years ago.

Just being informative.

Hey Serleran!

Is there even any vague guesses when the guys over at TLG will be releasing
the Castle Keepers Guide?

I've been dropping in to read some of the forum postings from time to time. Last I heard was that Steve Chenault was finishing up some writing and then it was due to head into layout.

Is there even any vague guesses when the guys over at TLG will be releasing the Castle Keepers Guide?

Heh, no, and I won't speculate. It is being written - this I know for fact.


Sorry, I will stop marketing.