|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Yep. 2e didn't do much to change the 1e relationship between the classes, other than to eliminate a few all together and add one (core). The magic user was still a glass cannon, and wasn't anything close to the 3x wizard, level by level, until well into double digits.
Oh, and Stoneskin, iirc, was a sixth level spell, so I doubt any 5th level magic users were casting it (for Cptexploderman). I think you also forget that you have to declare your actions before you roll initiative in 1e (I forget if they still did that in 2e), that high level spells took a LONG time to cast, relatively, and, even if you're stone skinned, it didn't take much to disrupt casting.
If the wizard could get the spell off, yeah, big time wow. But, in AD&D, getting that spell off was far from certain, unless your DM was a total pushover or ignored a ton of stuff.
3x? Let's see, even the most powerful spells generally take as long to cast as the lowliest first level spell, you can practically do cartwheels while casting, and even if you do get hit, you have an incredibly easy concentration check. Couple all of that with DCs that scale faster than save bonuses, all kinds of stuff to make SR a pointless stat in most cases, and the fact that the AD&D fighter got that 2/1 or 3/1 AND his move, and in 3x it was either/or, oh, yeah, 3x was "wizard" edition.
Almost nothing got past spell resistance. Fighters weren't caddies and sherpas in pre-3x D&D, not by a long shot.
Wizards of the Coast, for some reason, really liked wizards in 3x.
I am going to use the "15 year vacation" line. ;-)
So maybe the idea of it being more like previous editions is done by design, because that way when people look at it they'll say "Oh, this is definitely D&D."
This is it for me. I see the 3x and the 4e elements, but in general feel, it's more like 2e in a lot of ways. None of the esoteric stuff that I love from 1e (nostalgia, mostly) but a lot of 2e and beyond players don't like much. Which is cool, it's 2014, not 1980, after all.
The thing that says "this is D&D" most to me, though, is the flattened power curve (now that's 1e, for sure) and the fact that fighters are supposed to be pretty bad ass (1e fighters were mechanically boring, but they were deadly), and wizards aren't supposed to be invulnerable (an issue with high level 3x). I feel 5e addressed the power divide 3x brought in the martial vs magical classes quite well, actually.
Celestial Healer wrote:
PS1 and PS2. Absolutely. PS3 and the XBox were the beginning of "you don't get the whole game for $60, and it isn't really portable even if you sign in to your account from another machine" stuff.
Well, Gorbacz is kind of a hipster lookin' guy, and the bride is pretty, they were just doing us a favor ;-)
Kelsey Arwen MacAilbert wrote:
Um, the more important question is, why do cons allow registered sex offenders to buy tickets and be around children? I don't leave my kids with anyone I do not know and trust completely (mostly just a couple I babysit for when they need a break and relatives).
Also, maybe I'm a little leery of letting anyone I don't know well into my home, and want to make sure anyone I invite to a home game isn't on file as being a chomo.
Personal research. No hyperbole.
One dude, a professor of mine, was a good DM and I asked him to run a game for my group. I eventually moved away, but the group still played with him and they became close. He babysat for one of the guys and molested his kids, and did time. I found out, and I have been careful ever since, which is easier now with the SO registry.
I didn't start hard core using the DPS Sex Offender registry until I went back on my first violation in 2011 and all of the SOs had been "outed". Until then, I only used it for people I was thinking of inviting into my home. After then, I did so to see how bad it was.
Celestial Healer wrote:
Yeah, the memory cards for the PS1 and PS2 were awesome in this regard. I am starting to hate my PS3 enough to never want a PS4 (just more of what I hate about modern console gaming).
Beautiful pics at that. Lovely bride. Lovely looking ceremony. Well done all around.
The sixth printing of the 1e AD&D PHB (1982) is probably the best selling RPG hardcover of all time. They wen't for $12 a pop. Jacobs has already stated on a thread a while back that 1e PHB sales dwarfed 3x PHB in volume. Back then, only DMS bought the MM and DMG for the most part, so those books may not have sold as well as their 3x counterparts through the run.
My order would be WEG d6 #1, SAGA #2, SWd20 #2,198,753. I haven't played the new one yet.
I loved every WEG game I played, and I hate that they're gone. WEG, Chaosium, and TSR were my '80s, gaming-wise. SW SAGA was a good system, and a definite improvement over d20. I actually wish 4e were MORE like SAGA, I might have enjoyed the game a lot more. d20 Star Wars, well, I just pretend it doesn't exist, much like Episodes 1-3.
Get a hold of as much of the Second Edition stuff as you can afford. From what I can tell, 5e would work well in the older iteration of the Realms, if you wanted to play "classic". 3e wasn't that much of a change, maybe a little darker, but there wasn't a huge RSE heralding the change, simply the return of Bane and Shade, and pretending the Shadow Weave was always there. Either one is a good bet for a fun Realms experience.
I am looking forward to seeing how they fix the damage they did with 4e. Maybe 5e Realms stuff will fit with the lore I already have on the shelf.
Oh, yeah. Almost forgot the actual reason for popping in for all of the whining,
Picked up the PHB Monday. Not too shabby. Kind of a "D&D Greatest Hits" feel, rules-wise. Could have done without the dragonborn and tieflings in core, but oh well. I guess it feels like 3e had 3e been a logical progression of 2e with skills and powers instead of some kind of D&D/Warhammer Fantasy/Rolemaster mash-up.
I like it so far, can't wait until the rest of the core is released.
The draft rates magically evened out when Nixon yanked student deferments.
If you're planning on committing a crime, pick an Arizona area that isn't Mariposa County. Tent City sucks, but the Arizona State prisons are fairly laid back. New Mexico isn't that bad, either.
If you're a non-violent drug offender, Texas isn't that bad. If you're a violent offender or a child molester, the prisons you're sent to are pretty scary.
Avoid breaking the law in California. Their prisons make Texas look enlightened.
Ditto Florida. Ugh.
Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, also bad places to go to prison.
But, if you're serious about a life of crime, go to Canada if you're broke, Mexico if you have money. Canadian jails and prisons are more "Northern European" style in set up and philosophy, and Mexican jails are FUN if you have bribe money (I know the last one from experience).
You answered your own question. In the U.S., high level drug dealers tend to get twenty, thirty, forty year, life. Stuff like that. And, compared to northern European "prisons" (ha), American prisons are brutal.
So, European drug trafficker is looking at cupcake time in a cupcake jail, plenty of furlough time, and not much of it at all, really.
American drug trafficker, if he has a gun, is looking at a LOT of time, possibly life (depending on the drug amount and the total charges) in a s&!#hole with a bunch of idiots trying to stab and/or rape him, crap food, and sadistic imbeciles holding the keys to the cell. Yeah, going to prison in Europe for most crimes is an inconvenience. In the U.S. it can be a nightmare.
Also, as far as I can tell, cops in Europe tend not to be total pricks. Cops here think they're the kings of the street, above the law, that they can talk to anyone any way they like, that people MUST respect their authority and them personally, and they are very quick to implement a beat down if you get even slightly sideways with them. You said your criminals know they won't get shot if they act right. American criminals do not have that luxury. Our cops are quick to pull a trigger, and we know it. They're also more or less immune from any legal consequences, a jury here would almost never convict a cop for an on duty shooting.
Gee, I wonder why criminals in America are different. :-)
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Yeah, I had a collection guy that didn't have anything else to do with anything. I was involved with the cartels for about seven or eight years before I went to prison, and never felt the need to carry a gun. Never even owned one, and I was moving and selling pretty serious amounts of product.
Most violence in the drug game is directly related to prohibition. The guy that got robbed? He was robbed mostly because he can't call the cops. If he is connected to something larger, be it a gang or a cartel, they'll take up the "law enforcement" role and handle the problem.
I think people think violence is a huge problem in the drug game because they do not really understand how HUGE the market is in the country. Violence is a small part of the drug universe, and legalization in Colorado has had a calming effect, at least in the pot game. Also, most drug users are white, aren't poor, and have "safe" connections. Hippies and ravers aren't gun types, and they're responsible for a mostly chill MDMA, pot, LSD, mushroom trade. It's mostly people involved in gangs in poor areas and organized crime types moving cocaine, meth and heroin (it's making a comeback, kids!) that are violent. The cartels and mob for their reasons, and gangs mostly because they're poor, nihilistic, fatalistic, and stuck.
The smarter drug dealers also know that possession of a weapon has serious consequences if they're caught. In the Feds, for instance, you're almost guaranteed five to ten years on top of the underlying drug charge, and all kinds of restrictions on programming and prison security level (possession of a weapon, even if it's in your house and you're busted ten miles away, makes a drug possession charge a "crime of violence). And, most non-violent drug offenders go to low security or minimum security facilities, which are cupcake farms compared to the mediums and the U.S. Penitentiaries (USP). The USPs are where the really wicked and vile Fed inmates go, and it's everything you think about when you think about prison. Lows and camps are more boring and annoying than dangerous.
The same goes for most state joints too. The admins do not mix violent and non-violent offenders if they can help it.
What really got the ball rolling (after L.A. invented S.W.A.T. in the wake of the riots) were the drug wars in Miami. The mentality of law enforcement went from "pot dealers and junk dealers are [hippies/jive moos/whatever]" to be slapped around a bit for selling "crap to kids" to "sub machine gun wielding psychopath who will never go easy". When, in reality, most dealers didn't change. Gang violence? That will exist whether dope is legal or not. That problems is a whole other can of worms where a whole bunch of people need to back away and look at themselves and come correct. On both sides. Drugs are just an easy scapegoat, and the open season on black youth is easier than actually fixing the many, many issues poverty, crappy education, a treadmill "welfare" system that does nothing to elevate anyone, etc, cause for the people living in our worst areas.
But, yeah, most people selling drugs only have to worry about getting busted. Most never get robbed, need a gun, or any of that.
Dr. Obscure wrote:
FR? Either end it in Thay, placing the first module in, say, Westgate and the second someplace in Chessenta, or use the Zhents and go north, or Sword Coast?
We're talking one of each here ;-)
Without the OGL we had:
AD&D (what eventually became Pathfinder, is OSRIC, and basically is Castle and Crusades) - underwhelming example.
So, the OGL, again, basically made a market where it was all basically "Let's play 3.X in space/superheroes/spyland/Star Wars!!!".
Diversity. It's what the OGL KILLED, not encouraged.
Seriously, I don't care about OSRIC/castles and crusades/13th age/any d20 fantasy game other than D&D, I don't need twenty different names for basically the same d20 fantasy game. If I want a different flavor of fantasy, I want a completely different system so it feels different. Not the exact same mechanics with different fluff.
What was the actual effect of the OGL? A 3.5 clone called Pathfinder and a bunch of d20 games in a bunch of genres that used to be represented by unique systems back when game designers were original and not derivative copy cats. The OGL just made gaming look boringly same across the board. Give me the Eighties and Nineties when people made systems to fit a genre, and didn't try to shoehorn everything into one system. Meh.
5e will succeed based on the merits of the game and how well WotC supports it, and how discriminating they are about who gets to publish 3pp material for it (i.e. none of that Mongoose and AEG crap, for instance). The OGL was a good thing for people who like rolling nothing but d20s, but it really sucked for diversity in the market, and it really screwed WotC in the end. 4e didn't do as well as expected for a ton of reasons, but the GSL was probably the least of them, to be frank. Killing a bunch of sacred cows, pissing off (intentionally or not) a bunch of older gamers, butchering Faerun, and a game called Pathfinder that basically kept the immediately prior edition of D&D commercially alive and played broadly (albeit in the form of Jason's housrules) did far more damage to their market share than a restrictive license.
Funny, the GDQ 1-7 I had back in the day was the complete modules, plus filler material. No cuts. The editing for the D1-3 was changed around a bit to make it flow better, but every encounter was there.
If you play in Golarion, pick one area to campaign in. The world is a convoluted mess, no cohesiveness, and just exists to allow the writers freedom to do whatever zaniness they want. I miss Greyhawk, at least it had a narrative.
The maps are typical "European stuff is where Europe is, African stuff is where Africa is, and all the other analogues are where they are" kind of thing. Yawn.
If you're looking for something cohesive, Golarion isn't it. I do second the Varisia notion for setting your campaign in from Lord Gadigan. It's probably the most "Greyhawk" part of the setting.
Funny, I don't see any of that in the Core Rulebook for Pathfinder. Unless you have some secret edition I'm unaware of.