Anyone else play D&D?

Post Reply New Topic

No, rolling 3d6 for each stat yields an overall average of 10.5, with half of the stats being 3 to 10, and the other half being 11 to 18. I've studied statistics, and even used dice-rolling as part of my Master's thesis.

Sure, it's a game; but if everyone is a "hero", then nobody is exceptional.

I have played my 'average' characters in tourneys where 4D6-L, 3D4+6, and other variations of maxing a character were used, and I always ended up earning the "Best Player" award -- obviously not for having a badass character, and not for being a munchkin, either. I won those awards for playing the character as a person rather than merely as a collection of stats and arcane gear.

Some of us don't need munchkinized superheros to have fun. Others can't seem to enjoy the game until they've mutated their characters beyond recognition.

Yeah, that's what I said on the other page =) Demi-humans were supposed to be rare. They also had a level cap, and could only choose from one, maybe two classes each.

Paladins (and thieves) didn't come out until Greyhawk, druids were in Eldritch Wizardry. Neither were in B/X (thieves are), but Companion added them as this weird "once you reach level 9" option.

Not sure if rangers were around before AD&D.

I also meant to say something similar to what Fnord said, that sometimes good "role" playing can trump good "roll" playing. The character can only do so much without a player controlling it.

I totally agree with you on the roleplay heavy play him as a person angle, and I do. In the campaign in which I played Krenwulf I wanted a Viking warrior/Breserker type, and role played him like that to the hilt.

My actual experience with straight 3d6 characters is that in fact for most of them they had four average scores and two below average. Also, what are your thoughts on max HP at level 1? That's now a standard rule (at least in third ed) but it wasn't always. Still, most did play that way because if you started at level 1 and had a fighter with 2 HP he was pretty much dead the first time he had to fight an Orc. And that's a waste of character generation and etc.

I always thought the demihuman level cap was total BS. TOTAL BS. Elves are supposed to be some of the best magic slingers around, and the rules don't allow a level 20 Elf Mags. Dwarves are supposed to be warriors of renoun, and the rules wont allow a level 20 Dwarf warrior. Halflings are supposed to be great thieves, and the rules wont allow a level 20 Halfling thief. Its total garbage, considering their long lifespans.

What they did allow demihumans to do in first and second ed, and NOT humans, was to be a multiclassed character. My feelings are mixed on these. Like how come an Elf mage can learn to use a sword and armor with no interference in their magic, but a human mage can not? In the original d and d, Elf, Dwarf, and Halfling were CLASSES in and of themselves, and the Elf was basically an Ad and D fighter/mage. So I'm pretty sure that's where the advanced d and d first and second ed multiclassing came from.

Third ed threw all the doors open on this--any race can take a level of mage and learn some magic, a level of fighter and learn the sword, etc. Being someone raised on second ed, I don't like this much.

We should each generate a character for old times sake and tell how we would present/play him or her. Straight 3d6 under 2nd ed rules (that's true D and D as far as I'm concerned).

I don't remember that being in 3E, but we usually play with that rule.

5E has some weird new rule where if you don't want to roll for your hit points, you can just take the average instead.


I don't know what Gary's thought process was behind this (especially since most demihumans live a really long time), but from what I've heard, it wasn't uncommon for characters to "retire" at Name Level (level 9 I think?).

Of course, if the DM wants to allow higher levels than what's in the book, it's fair game. I've heard some of the early videogames kind of suffer from this, though.


Not exactly =) OD&D basically said that those races could only be specific classes, and it was B/X (maybe Holmes before that?) that simplified it by omitting the illusion of choice.

Greyhawk adds more choices, I think it added multiclassing too? I really need to buy and print out the supplements so I can read through them.

So, who else likes 3.0/3.5E?

Some of my friends like it a lot, but I've always felt like there were too many rules, and not enough play (if that makes sense). Like, for instance, character creation in 3.x takes a really long time, and my friends would always pour over the book(s), trying to find the best min/max, the best Feat progression, etc.

5 speeds up character creation a lot, and simplifies the Skills section. I still wish "attack of opportunity" would go away, though.

3.x and Pathfinder have some really good SRDs out there, though. We've been playing 5E lately, and the SRDs are okay, but they all seem to be based on the Basic book, so a lot of content is missing.

I'd been meaning to for a while but never got around to it. The problem is that I'll likely end up being the DM, which is great and fine by me, but being that I seem to be the only one that understands the general rules (at least, better than anybody else) I'm kind of condemned to exclusively play this role unless someone can be bothered to read the rules like I have.

I don't know where my adventures would be. I guess the most common setting is Sword Coast but I'd like to make my own (I was thinking of maybe creating my own island). I also wouldn't mind just expanding the rules and playing a sci fi, apocalyptic or horror RP instead. Cyberpunk would be cool, but the rule book for the game of the same name (the Mike Pondsmith one) is incredibly expensive.

I like Shadowrun a lot, though we didn't play it very often. You could probably get an older edition of that for a decent price, we used to play 2nd edition a lot, and maybe a little 3rd.

DriveThruRPG has quick-start rules for 3rd edition for free: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/18 ... rd-Edition

$18.40 for a PDF of the full book: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/18 ... rd-Edition

Looks pretty cool, thanks for the link. I'll need to check that out at some point. I really want to get into pen and paper sometime soon.

There's Shadowrun videogames too. I haven't played the newer ones yet (but they go on sale quite often, so I've snatched them up), but I really liked the SNES game back in the day. They're supposed to be spiritual sequels to that game and the Genesis game (which is completely different).

Just avoid the FPS game for the 360, it's pretty bad.

I played DND back in high school, i was a freshman when i first heard about it and became interested, i decided to join as a way to make friends. i was immediately hooked to the game. the adventures were fun but very heated. but we never beaten a campaign.

I have done the session zero for the first actual campaign I will be a part of as a player. it is going to be pirates, and I will be playing a skeevy Mammon Tiefling, who is a warlock of Cthulhu, and acting as the ship's experienced merchant. I rolled a bit under average, so my strength is a 7.