Starlord Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... I'm surprised at how there seems to universal loathing for D&D. After HERO it has been my most consistently played game system for 20+ years. If I were to give grades, I'd hand out low grades to the systems that just didn't work or are flat-out broken (Villains & Vigilantes for example). I guess Gygax and co. have been fooling everyone for 30 years.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dust Raven Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... I'm surprised at how there seems to universal loathing for D&D. After HERO it has been my most consistently played game system for 20+ years. If I were to give grades' date=' I'd hand out low grades to the systems that just didn't work or are flat-out broken (Villains & Vigilantes for example). I guess Gygax and co. have been fooling everyone for 30 years....[/quote'] I've noticed a few people giving D&D high (or at least not abysmally low) marks, myself included. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy_The_Ruthles Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... I've found hero system to have the best support of any game system i've played. It usually takes less than 24 hrs to get an answer, while for WW WotC and Mongoose it might take upwards of a week (it's been a month since i sent one question in...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... I guess you didn't read my post very well then. Try again. Which one? First you say it's only a C. Then you say it is cumbersome. Then you say it is still good. You say newer gamers would give it a high rating, but then you say your scale is based on how easy it is to learn and it isn't. Why would newer gamers think it is great at first if the main problem with it is that it is hard to learn? Seem like you go back and forth. Furthermore, it's your scale and you can do with it as you please, but why does it only take into account how easy it is to learn? Seems like that's only a small portion of what a game is about. By that scale, the old MSH game should be given an A+++++ cuz you or I could learn that one in 5-10 mins. PS: Sometimes I can be taken the wrong way. I ask because I'm curious not to argue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MitchellS Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... Which one? First you say it's only a C. Then you say it is cumbersome. Then you say it is still good. You say newer gamers would give it a high rating, but then you say your scale is based on how easy it is to learn and it isn't. Why would newer gamers think it is great at first if the main problem with it is that it is hard to learn? Seem like you go back and forth. Furthermore, it's your scale and you can do with it as you please, but why does it only take into account how easy it is to learn? Seems like that's only a small portion of what a game is about. By that scale, the old MSH game should be given an A+++++ cuz you or I could learn that one in 5-10 mins. PS: Sometimes I can be taken the wrong way. I ask because I'm curious not to argue. My point was that I play Hero, so I rated those games based on how easy it was for me to read them, learn them, and play them in a reasonable amount of time. I found Exalted, SAS and M&M to be easier to read and understand, and easier to get to the playing, then Hero. If I were to play any of those games for 6 months on a weekly or bi-weekly basis I might find serious faults with them. But for what limited play I have done with them the games were much easier to learn and use than 5E. There are plenty of people who come to these boards lost and confused after trying to read 5E. I did not experience that problem with either SAS, M&M, or Exalted. To me those games were intuitive and designed to get people playing rather than reading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MitchellS Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... Which one? First you say it's only a C. Then you say it is cumbersome. Then you say it is still good. You say newer gamers would give it a high rating' date=' but then you say your scale is based on how easy it is to learn and it isn't. Why would newer gamers think it is great at first if the main problem with it is that it is hard to learn? [/quote'] I wanted to address this part separately. One of the things about Hero is that once people get it, they get it. They like the freedom Hero gives them. They haven't really experienced that in D&D so Hero's like an eye-opening experience. They are happy. It's like a honeymoon. But after you've played it a while you start seeing some cracks. Then you start creating some house rules to fix those cracks. A few years down the road you've become a full-blown tinkerer. Now you're arguing whether strength should cost 1 point or 2. Your looking for ways to fix the problems "you see" but you still love the versatility and freedom of Hero. The honeymoon is over. Now comes the working on the lasting love. Some people keep that love going [i do] and some people get a divorce and run to that cute young thing who lives at the Green Ronin mansion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nadrakas Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... Nadrakas put a lot of work into that but there are underlying assumptions about what is good and bad that I don't share. While I have no interest in a class-based system in Superhero Campaigns I think they have their place in certain other settings. Also, no mention was made up support, supplements, etc. One of the things that won the day for AD&D for me, was the wonderfully huge assortment of spells that I didn't have to come up with by myself. In a fantasy setting, that sort of thing matters a great deal to me. AgentX I don’t expect anyone to share my assumptions on what is good/bad in a system. I also don’t like/hate class-based systems – the “Pigeonholing†I mentioned simply means that the player has less options as they advance their character (ie: I’m X-Level…I’m a fighter…I can’t learn magic). The newest version of D&D (ie: d20) does allow for more freedom in this area (ie: easier cross-classing), but even then you are limited. - I will admit that I prefer classless systems, but I can work with them. It’s easy after gaming all them years. I also didn’t mention supplements because this is an even grayer area than the Main Books – one thing that I don’t like about some games is that they seem to be intentionally designed so that you “need†the supplements in order to make the game complete. AD&D 2nd started doing that toward the end…that’s why I stopped buying them. - On this note, the d20 system has a lot of supplements for them. I think that most of the ones put out by WoTC are pretty good, but the 3rd party ones are hit & miss. - To me many of the spells in the AD&D system were not necessarily balanced with each other. The d20 system is a lot more balanced. As far as adventures go…well some are good, some are bad…I don’t think I’ve run an adventure as written in oh…the last 25+ years. As far as support (I assume rules arbitration, customer & fan support) -- well, many of the older systems were supported only via Company Magazines (ie: Dragon, White Wolf, etc) and you had to purchase them in order to get the “official†rules judgement. Today many companies have Forums that you can get questions answered, though for some the Company Magazine is still the main stay (ie: Dragon). To me DoJ has done a pretty good job in this area. I’m not going to include this as a separate area for any of the RPGs I wrote about because to be honest…I didn’t follow their advice when I was younger & I didn’t shell out what little money I had then (or now) on Company Magazines. Nadrakas..."Everyone is due his opinion...whether others like it or not." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nadrakas Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... Have you played WW's Abbereant/Trinity setting/ rules? Pretty close to the original WOD but with some changes that made a better flow. And they contained less angst. How would you rate them? Tim, thank you for asking. My opinion of course I’ve played Aberrant…got the whole lot of books. I ran it for quite a while. Aberrant - Appearance: C. While the artwork definitely lends itself to the world, there is a tendency toward giving too much. - Character Creation: B Pretty easy to create a character and update. A big limit is Quantum – you need a high Quantum to get some of the powers. - Index/Table of Contents: C. Many things can be found with ease. One thing that I don’t like about many of WW’s books, including the “Aeoniverse,†is that world specific information is rolled into the rules section & vice versa. - Rules Complexity: C - Rules Consistency: C - Tinkering Ability: C. Tinkering can be done. If you want a normal Superhero world, then do away with Taint. If you don’t mind a dark sword hanging over your players head then keep it. - Overall Rating: C+ Nadrakas..."Everyone is due his opinion...whether others like it or not." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nadrakas Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... Nadrakas' date=' you didn't give out a single A in any of the sub-categories for any of the game systems.[/quote'] Super Squirrel, No I didn’t. As I said I’m pretty critical about things. I tend to dissect things…especially RPGs – comes from playing so many of them I guess. My personal opinion is that there is very little in this world, including RPGs, that can’t use some improvement. Nadrakas..."Everyone is due his opinion...whether others like it or not." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nadrakas Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... That's a really excellent rating system (and repped), but I do think you are missing some key areas. Support: How well is the system supported, not just from the publisher, but from other players who may have useful information on the web concerning the game. Flexibility: While "tinkering" would be included in this, I think it's important for rules to be flexible, with many consistant options depending on how complex or simple a game you'd like to play. Rules Complexity would probably indicate the required or default level of complexity, rather than the maximum (or range of)complexity. Other than that, you seem to have a heavy bias against what you call "pidgeonholing" and what I call character classes. Dust Raven, Thank you for the Rep...it's much appreciated. As far as support, see above for my response to AgentX. As far as Flexibility…hmmm…to me Tinkering & Flexibility are somewhat interchangeable. {Shrug} You can easily consider them that for this purpose in this case. As far as Pigeonholing – I’m not meaning character classes, though the various incarnations of D&D & Palladium use them. If you look at the other games I consider to be Pigeonholing you will see Star Trek the RPG (FASA - Ship Position), WW – Exalted (Castes…), & WW –WoD (Clans, Tribe, etc). In fact, in WoD/Exalted/Aeoniverse you are also Pigeonholded due to some “darkness†within you (ie: Beast, Taint, The Great Curse, etc). All of these are classless systems, as compared to D&D/d20/Palladium and to me they still Pigeonhole you. - As I have said before, I prefer classless systems. I prefer them because they allow for more character development, both during creation & advancement. I’m don’t hate classes and I can work with them. Nadrakas..."Everyone is due his opinion...whether others like it or not." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTesla Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... I'm surprised at how there seems to universal loathing for D&D. After HERO it has been my most consistently played game system for 20+ years. Personally, I'd give D&D high marks. It would only be when I put it against HERO that D&D wouldn’t even rate. Sometimes I feel like the simplicity of filling in the blanks on a character sheet then stomping through a dungeon, but more often I need more. Another system that I would give high marks to is Rolemaster / Spacemaster. It got a bit heavy with 7 supplemental books, and several “Law†books, but it was a great fantasy set up. EDIT: To try and make a little more sense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casualplayer Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... There seems to be very little crap cutting going on here. Everyone here on the boards is either a prospective HERO-phile or a passionate fanatic. All the criticism is well meant, if not always well-phrased. So what's with all the grade flinging? For my sake, 5th Ed made a decision to stay almost compatible with 4th Ed. Not the choice I would have made but certainly an arguable one. There are flaws (it's not a flaw; it's a feature!) but they remained out of a conscious decision not neglect. Steve has designed or consulted on like 187 different rules systems; he's pretty sharp at this stuff! If he was mostly stupid and wanted to be his own competition, I am sure he has a strong, workable alternative superhero RPG roaming around in his head. For my money, this is the game to play. I can't play other games without seeing how HERO would simulate it better. That doesn't mean that it can't improve though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemming Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... Ok. If other people are going to grade systems, I'll grade some I haven't seen listed Fantasy Trip: A+ : It got me into RPG's. D&D & Boothill just didn't make it for me. Top Secret: B, best secret agent game I played before Espionage. Though it was quite wonky... Monster Monster: Silly Silly. Where else can you have your Orc ride a War Slug into battle? Creeks & Crawdads: Best post apolyptic game ever! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent X Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... AgentX I don’t expect anyone to share my assumptions on what is good/bad in a system. I also don’t like/hate class-based systems – the “Pigeonholing†I mentioned simply means that the player has less options as they advance their character (ie: I’m X-Level…I’m a fighter…I can’t learn magic). The newest version of D&D (ie: d20) does allow for more freedom in this area (ie: easier cross-classing), but even then you are limited. - I will admit that I prefer classless systems, but I can work with them. It’s easy after gaming all them years. I also didn’t mention supplements because this is an even grayer area than the Main Books – one thing that I don’t like about some games is that they seem to be intentionally designed so that you “need†the supplements in order to make the game complete. AD&D 2nd started doing that toward the end…that’s why I stopped buying them. - On this note, the d20 system has a lot of supplements for them. I think that most of the ones put out by WoTC are pretty good, but the 3rd party ones are hit & miss. - To me many of the spells in the AD&D system were not necessarily balanced with each other. The d20 system is a lot more balanced. As far as adventures go…well some are good, some are bad…I don’t think I’ve run an adventure as written in oh…the last 25+ years. As far as support (I assume rules arbitration, customer & fan support) -- well, many of the older systems were supported only via Company Magazines (ie: Dragon, White Wolf, etc) and you had to purchase them in order to get the “official†rules judgement. Today many companies have Forums that you can get questions answered, though for some the Company Magazine is still the main stay (ie: Dragon). To me DoJ has done a pretty good job in this area. I’m not going to include this as a separate area for any of the RPGs I wrote about because to be honest…I didn’t follow their advice when I was younger & I didn’t shell out what little money I had then (or now) on Company Magazines. Nadrakas..."Everyone is due his opinion...whether others like it or not." I was paying you a complement while disagreeing with you. I liked AD&D spells because they felt organic and weren't necessarily balanced. Balance can be boring. It's really cool as a mage in a fantasy setting when you find one of those really good spells at x level. I mean, does anyone think there is a real rationale in pre-game fantasy settings for balanced spells? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nadrakas Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... I was paying you a complement while disagreeing with you. Thanks. Didn't think you were attacking me. Didn't mean to come across "mean." (I'm really a laid back pussy cat...Meow ) Nadrakas... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dust Raven Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... Dust Raven, Thank you for the Rep...it's much appreciated. As far as support, see above for my response to AgentX. Caught it, thanks. As far as Flexibility…hmmm…to me Tinkering & Flexibility are somewhat interchangeable. {Shrug} You can easily consider them that for this purpose in this case. Okay. As far as Pigeonholing – I’m not meaning character classes, though the various incarnations of D&D & Palladium use them. If you look at the other games I consider to be Pigeonholing you will see Star Trek the RPG (FASA - Ship Position), WW – Exalted (Castes…), & WW –WoD (Clans, Tribe, etc). In fact, in WoD/Exalted/Aeoniverse you are also Pigeonholded due to some “darkness†within you (ie: Beast, Taint, The Great Curse, etc). All of these are classless systems, as compared to D&D/d20/Palladium and to me they still Pigeonhole you. - As I have said before, I prefer classless systems. I prefer them because they allow for more character development, both during creation & advancement. I’m don’t hate classes and I can work with them. Ah. I'm not familiar with Star Trek RPG, but WoD I am. I consider WoD to be a classed system like D&D and Palladium. You don't write up your character al-la carte, you have to pick large sections of things (i.e. you clan, tribe, philosophy, etc) and you're stuck with it and all it comes with. Same thing with D&D, etc... you buy up at bulk rates and save on time. In any case, it just seemed like you had a grudge against any non-al-la-carte systems, or at least systems that didn't have an option for al-la-carte character creation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nadrakas Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... In any case' date=' it just seemed like you had a grudge against any non-al-la-carte systems, or at least systems that didn't have an option for al-la-carte character creation.[/quote'] Nah...to me Pigeonholing means that your led by the nose in gaining powers/skills/abilities/etc. I like for my players (and that's what it usually is...I haven't been a player on a consistent basis in many, many years -- hmmm...realistically 20+ years. Only a handful of one/two shots) to be able to have the option of taking their character in whatever direction the campaign Genre allows. While you can do it with the affor mentioned Games, it requires varying amounts of tinkering -- something something that can confuse players & GM alike and can unbalance a game. Nadrakas... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
proditor Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... Well, here are my rankings and they are completely subjective. Based on how much I got out of the game, how long I played it and do I still go back to it now. Some of the above is based on complexity, some on internal consistency and/or balance in the system. Villains and Vigilantes: B+ (Still mining it for ideas and it was FUN!) Marvel Super Heroes: C+ (A lot broken, a lot inconsistent, but quick to set up and usually fun) Hero 5th: A- (Yeah, I'd change Vehicles and a few powers, but I keep coming back to it over an over again. Always fun) Mutants and Masterminds: C- (Just doesn't work for me on many many levels) Silver Age Sentinels : B+ (A lot to like here) Heroes Unlimited: D+ (A few minor good ideas overshadowed by a trainwreck of a system after they kludged it to Superheroes) DC Heroes (Mayfair): B- (Liked the system a lot but it didn't get a lot of play) DC Heroes (WEG): C (Pretty but intrinsically flawed on several levels and required many patches to work) Godlike: C- (Awesome presentation diluted by a system that allowed me to beat it like a red-headed stepchild inside of one week's ownership) Non Super: TORG: A- (Yeah, there are problems but I have never ever played a game that simulated a fast paced movie style game so well. Low leanring curve, quick character creation) World of Darkness: C- (A great premise ruined by an almost completely arbitrary system and later sourcebooks that were not consistent) D&D 1/2: C- (Yeah, it was broken, but I got a lot of play out of it) D&D 2nd with options: B (Once you added choice back into the mix, it started really working) D&D 3.0: C- (And then it became about who had the bigger "sword".) D&D 3.5: D- (But they couldn't leave well enough alone and broke it more) Top Secret: B- (Wonky rules counterbalanced by lots of play and fun) Star Frontiers: C+ (Some great, some awful, but mostly fun) Tales of the Floating vagabond: B- (Fun, quick, beer and pretzels game) Mechwarrior: C- (How to ruin a fun, quick, beer and pretzels game (Battletech)) GURPS: B+ (Very good at the lower end, but I broke the system with Supers. Still, we had a lot of fun as dimension hopping monster hunters) Rifts: D (I should take back my comment on D&D 3.0, since the "sword-waving" is even worse here) Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: B- (A lot of fun for me, my group, and my younger brothers. Got a lot of mileage out of this one.) Gamma World (1-3rd): C+ (Yeah, it was also broken, but I had fun irradiating baddies with my HANDS OF POWER!!!) Shadowrun: B, slipped to C- (Great in 2nd edition IMHO, but the more they tinkered, like most FASA games, the more Byzantine it got.) Those are the only ones that spring to mind, and as is probably apparent, I definitely do not favor one style (Complex vs. simplified) of game. Sometimes simplicity is a virtue, sometimes it's just bad design. YMMV of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Black Lotus Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... In any case' date=' it just seemed like you had a grudge against any non-al-la-carte systems, or at least systems that didn't have an option for al-la-carte character creation.[/quote'] -I- have a problem with non-a-la-carte game systems. The problem is that basically, a game's core axioms are like the source code for a computer program. When the designers of a system, say d20, keep the axioms of their systems to themselves, they make it difficult to create balanced and calculated new vehicles, "Powers", and spells, and damned near impossible to come up with new classes or prestige classes. All of their sourcebooks basically just give out new spells and prestige classes and items, with little in the way of descriptive content. They keep the core axioms secret so that the only way to get cool new stuff, for many gamers, is to buy all the new books. HERO publishes lots of books -- after all, publish or perish -- BUT HERO HAS AN OPEN SOURCE CODE: 5ER. I can do everything in all the HERO supplements myself in a logical fashion with the basic rulebook, but the supplements take care of all that for you, if you are willing to pay Steve and the team for their hard, honest effort. That forces the supplements to be full of relevant, high-quality information. Unlike d20's supplements, which are crap. Crap, I say. HERO's supplements KICK ASS. I've seen hundreds of supplement RPG rulebooks in my time, and HERO's are simply the best. So yeah. -I- have a problem with non-a-la-carte. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent X Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... -I- have a problem with non-a-la-carte game systems. The problem is that basically' date=' a game's core axioms are like the source code for a computer program. When the designers of a system, say d20, keep the axioms of their systems to themselves, they make it difficult to create balanced and calculated new vehicles, "Powers", and spells, and damned near [i']impossible[/i] to come up with new classes or prestige classes. All of their sourcebooks basically just give out new spells and prestige classes and items, with little in the way of descriptive content. They keep the core axioms secret so that the only way to get cool new stuff, for many gamers, is to buy all the new books. HERO publishes lots of books -- after all, publish or perish -- BUT HERO HAS AN OPEN SOURCE CODE: 5ER. I can do everything in all the HERO supplements myself in a logical fashion with the basic rulebook, but the supplements take care of all that for you, if you are willing to pay Steve and the team for their hard, honest effort. That forces the supplements to be full of relevant, high-quality information. Unlike d20's supplements, which are crap. Crap, I say. HERO's supplements KICK ASS. I've seen hundreds of supplement RPG rulebooks in my time, and HERO's are simply the best. So yeah. -I- have a problem with a-la-carte. I have a feeling what I'm about to say for AD&D I could say for 3rd Edition if I cared to play it. I never had a problem in AD&D making up new classes or kits. Frankly, I didn't really see much of a need for new classes but I did come up with a few kits. There's no secret source code to AD&D. You just make it up and fine tune it until it's acceptable. There is a certain superiority to games like this. You're really only judging a rules addition by its actual effect instead of justifying it with a kit-building system that allows you to manipulate points and accidentally/intentionally create the best character/archetype/whatever to be introduced in the game. As a GM, I can tell you this, sometimes I don't want my players having total freedom to build any character they want to. Sometimes, there are definite distinctions that I want to make between ethnicities or races or whatever and I don't want them crossed. There's nothing wrong with that. If I ran Anything Goes Fantasy, then HERO would be the system to go with. As it is, I run 2nd Ed. Options AD&D because the class/race system enforces the genre I want enforced. Of course, I play with house rules and I'm very involved in how the players design their characters, to the point of giving them special abilities they don't have to pay for that serve mainly to make their characters more "alive" and individual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Squirrel Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... Be careful what you sell. One of the best Fantasy Hero games I ever ran was set in Greyhawk. You never know with might be useful in 5-10 years. I'm keeping the "good" books. I'm keeping the Ruins of Castle Greyhawk Adventure, 3rd Edition Dragon Lance Settings, Forgotten Realms Settings, all of the TMNT books, the Stronghold Building Guide, and a couple of other ones that slip my mind at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Mhoram Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... Why would anyone need 50 D&D books. I own' date=' maybe 10... and they're all I'll never need (PHB, DMG, MM, Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance & each of the class books (from Wotc, not Mongoose)).[/quote'] I've got 110 that I have that I use (given 40 of those are just monster books, and about a third of what's left are different settings). You don't really _need_ the rest but they are fun. I have about another 60 upstairs that I don't use all that much... mostly other D20 non D&D esq stuff (Judge Dread, Spycraft, Star Wars, M&M) And the only way I can afford them all is that I get them at cost at the game store I work at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Black Lotus Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... I'm keeping the "good" books. I'm keeping the Ruins of Castle Greyhawk Adventure, 3rd Edition Dragon Lance Settings, Forgotten Realms Settings, all of the TMNT books, the Stronghold Building Guide, and a couple of other ones that slip my mind at the moment. I'm keeping the Draconomicon, Ravenloft Campaign Setting, um... well, that may be it. Not sure yet. I may keep the Monster Manuals. Only for reference, though... after HERO, I can never go back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dust Raven Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... -I- have a problem with non-a-la-carte game systems. I suppose I do as well, but not quite that extreme. I do understand that AD&D Options was very a-la-carte, but with absolutely no reference as to what value anything really had. Even in 3rd you can't compare one 1st level spell with another 1st levels spell, or even Strength wth Charimsa. So if you want to make something youself, everything is completely up to the GM's intuition. But if you just want to open it up and play, you can do that without any hastle at all, which is one of the reasons I like it, even though it's not a-la-carte. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dust Raven Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Re: Lets cut the crap... I've got 110 that I have that I use (given 40 of those are just monster books, and about a third of what's left are different settings). You don't really _need_ the rest but they are fun. I have about another 60 upstairs that I don't use all that much... mostly other D20 non D&D esq stuff (Judge Dread, Spycraft, Star Wars, M&M) And the only way I can afford them all is that I get them at cost at the game store I work at. Dude... that's a LOT of freakin' monsters! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.