|
Atarlost, I've used 3d6 down the line in 3.5 and still made characters that weren't horribly impaired due to having some lowish stats. Although there are things that can make low stats dangerous such as certain poisons and diseases. On the other hand, it's so much easier to improve your attributes in 3.5 and Pathfinder then it was in 2nd edition.
Yeah Raz, we kinda get character concepts and get attached to them these days. Then again we can afford to get attached to them since the lethality of these games has gone down enough to that as long as you have good tactics your character isn't gonna die before level 2 barring a bad crit. This isn't me spewing hyperbole, I've heard from someone that grew up with 1st ed saying that getting to level 2 before dying proved you were a f~&&ing champ in that age.
I'm not saying that's bad, but it sounds really hard to enjoy playing both in terms of combat and roleplaying that game when you have to bring a new character every 3 sessions or so. I mean maybe it was different for other tables but from what I heard of his tales as well as the tales of a few other people I'm inclined to believe it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah Raz, we kinda get character concepts and get attached to them these days. Then again we can afford to get attached to them since the lethality of these games has gone down enough to that as long as you have good tactics your character isn't gonna die before level 2 barring a bad crit. This isn't me spewing hyperbole, I've heard from someone that grew up with 1st ed saying that getting to level 2 before dying proved you were a f$#$ing champ in that age.
I'm not saying that's bad, but it sounds really hard to enjoy playing both in terms of combat and roleplaying that game when you have to bring a new character every 3 sessions or so. I mean maybe it was different for other tables but from what I heard of his tales as well as the tales of a few other people I'm inclined to believe it.
I've played half-elf fighter mages since I first started 2nd edition AD&D. ONE spell per day, doesn't matter how smart you are. You get one spell per day at level one. Int just lets you eventually learn higher level spells, you can know more spells each level max, and you have a better chance to learn new spells.
Okay, fine... right? Wrong. NO armor unless you're an elf or half elf. Even then, you're only able to wear elven chainmail if you want to cast spells. To get elven chainmail you need to basically impress an elven smith who makes it for you. You're probably not gonna just find it in a chest. Can't use a shield either, need that hand free to cast spells.
Okay, then maybe you have enough hit points to survive a fight? Not really. Fighters get 1d10 hit points per level. Wizards get 1d4 hit points per level. You have to roll your hit die even at level 1. I've seen strait fighters with less health then the wizard due to bad rolls. Oh, those die rolls for your hit points? What ever you roll on each die, halve it. Actually, you divide each die roll by the number of classes you have. But this is a fighter/mage so it's 1/2.
There is no lower limit. So if you have 2 classes, and rolled a 1 for both, your base hit points without con bonus are a total of 1. That's 0.5+0.5. About your con bonus... Is one of your classes a Warrior class? That means fighter, ranger, or paladin. If yes, is your con 17 or 18? Yes or no? If yes, congrats. You get 3 to 4 hit points each level from con. You get half of that bonus when each class advances (and they aren't going to advance at the same time). If no to either of the previous two questions then you get 2 HP at most from con. Divide the bonus among the classes you have when they level. So if you had 4 classes on your multi-class build somehow, you get 0.5 HP when each separate class levels for a total of 2 HP.
What does all this mean? Well, unless my half elf fighter/mage had rolled really well on con, at level 1 I have somewhere between 1 and 9 hit points. Most likely between 4 and 7 hit points. But hey, I can use an assortment of weapons, and can cast spells. Right?
I'm not saying 2nd edition was brutal on low level characters. But uhm, most characters in my experience never made it to level 4. Remember that fighter I mentioned who had less hit points then the wizard? He was suppose to be the party's front line fighter. He used a long sword and shield.
Just the fact Pathfinder gives you max hit die at level 1 makes it more survivable then 2nd edition. The fact the player of a barbarian tracks their own health makes it more survivable. No, really. In Complete Fighter there was a barbarian character kit for fighters. A core mechanic in 2nd edition for barbarians was that when they fly into a rage the GM tracks all damage the barbarian takes. The player had no idea how close they are to death... until the fight ended or they keeled over.
EDIT: Just double checked. Not only was there no lower limit for hit points on a multi-class character (or anyone for that matter), but you round any fractions down. So if you rolled snake eyes on your level 1 hit dice and didn't have a con bonus to HP... you have 0 hit points at level 1. Your dead before the game even starts.
Yeah Raz, we kinda get character concepts and get attached to them these days. Then again we can afford to get attached to them since the lethality of these games has gone down enough to that as long as you have good tactics your character isn't gonna die before level 2 barring a bad crit. This isn't me spewing hyperbole, I've heard from someone that grew up with 1st ed saying that getting to level 2 before dying proved you were a f#@!ing champ in that age.
I'm not saying that's bad, but it sounds really hard to enjoy playing both in terms of combat and roleplaying that game when you have to bring a new character every 3 sessions or so. I mean maybe it was different for other tables but from what I heard of his tales as well as the tales of a few other people I'm inclined to believe it.
I understand the appeal of planning and tinkering with builds, and to do that you cannot (of course) rely on chance, or play a game were PCs die like flies. It's just horses for courses, and as you say, when your character didn't have a long expected life span rolling new ones needed to be quick and dirty.
(I remember almost every band of gnolls or whatever you fought having tied-up prisoners - hey, here's some new party members to replace our friends that just got their faces chewed off. Now, let's continue to the next dungeon room! :) Although we had lots of fun, I don't miss it. Everything is IMO miles better today in every regard - stories, rules, art, book quality, etc ((the paper they used in the 1st ed. books stank like a bugbear outhouse for some reason)). But it did have loads of charm in some rickety, weird way. Well, enough reminiscing about old times, now where's that impertinent nurse, I need my afternoon jello and a change of diapers - and she better not mix them up like she did yesterday! :)
|
|
Yeah Raz, we kinda get character concepts and get attached to them these days. Then again we can afford to get attached to them since the lethality of these games has gone down enough to that as long as you have good tactics your character isn't gonna die before level 2 barring a bad crit. This isn't me spewing hyperbole, I've heard from someone that grew up with 1st ed saying that getting to level 2 before dying proved you were a f#@!ing champ in that age.
I'm not saying that's bad, but it sounds really hard to enjoy playing both in terms of combat and roleplaying that game when you have to bring a new character every 3 sessions or so. I mean maybe it was different for other tables but from what I heard of his tales as well as the tales of a few other people I'm inclined to believe it.
I understand the appeal of planning and tinkering with builds, and to do that you cannot (of course) rely on chance, or play a game were PCs die like flies. It's just horses for courses, and as you say, when your character didn't have a long expected life span rolling new ones needed to be quick and dirty.
(I remember almost every band of gnolls or whatever you fought having tied-up prisoners - hey, here's some new party members to replace our friends that just got their faces chewed off. Now, let's continue to the next dungeon room! :) Although we had lots of fun, I don't miss it. Everything is IMO miles better today in every regard - stories, rules, art, book quality, etc ((the paper they used in the 1st ed. books stank like a bugbear outhouse for some reason)). But it did have loads of charm in some rickety, weird way. Well, enough reminiscing about old times, now where's that impertinent nurse, I need my afternoon jello and a change of diapers - and she better not mix them up like she did yesterday! :)
LOL ain't that the truth. I went to some games with a stack of characters already made up. Why? Because I knew the GM was particularly bloodthirsty.
Or as Will Wheeton put it in his commentary in DDO's Temple of Elemental Evil... "I cast Light, try not to let me die guys! I cast magic missile.... Look at me guys, I'm helping." But it was great fun. As a GM, it was easier to balance encounters. As a player, every encounter had the potential to go very wrong so good players got creative. Such as using a dwarf's ability to find the weakness in stone to help defeat a stone golem. Or finding creative ways to use magic missile against dragons.
And dear lord, when you knew you were going to be facing a dragon... You had an entire session of nothing but holding a strategy meeting on how you'd approach the fight to minimize the danger. Or when the truly idiotic barbarian (not using the kit mind you) kicks down the door and charges 30 orcs the entire party face palms.
Good times.
People who played 1st and 2nd edition understood challenge. So honestly, 3rd edition fells like easy mode. which turned me away from 3rd edition for years. Suddenly by level 3 a fighter can deal as much damage as a mid level fighter in 2nd edition, simply because of Power Attack. Or a level 6 rogue being able to laugh off a dragon's firebreath... which in 2nd edition it kind of took a level 20 fighter to even consider doing. Will saves with bonuses that make then far easier to make then in 2nd edition...
Heck, a level 5 monk is gonna make most will saves at level more often then a level of any class in 2nd edition ever did.
I like Pathfinder, but it still feels like easy mode. I can make an average Pathfinder character who completely outclasses anything I ever could do with my best min/max 2nd edition characters.
My current favorite method is heroic array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) plus 10 points no lowering stats for points. It allows people to specialize but keeps people somewhat diverse.