Usenet.com

www.Usenet.com

Group Index

Rec Thread Archive from Usenet.com

<-- __Chronological__ --> <-- __Thread__ -->

Re: Coming back to DnD



"Michael Scott Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> "Brandon Cope" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > "Malachias Invictus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>  news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > > "Wolfie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Mr. Brandon mentioned the 1e DMG so I thought I would get mine out and
>  read
> > > > their description of HP in the D&D inflationary HP system.
> > > >
> > > > The Following are various quotes from D&D DMG 1e page 82:
> > >
> > > Utterly irrelevant.  We are not talking about 1E here.
> >
> > Despite it having the best explaination of what inflationary HPs are?
> 
>     Get this through your fucking head - 1st edition's rationalizations were
> utterly absurd when subjected to scrutiny, and did not describe a believable
> set of assumptions.

The description of inflationary HPs in 1/e is the *only one* that
makes any sense in any version of AD&D (including 3.x).
 
> > Hps in 1979 under AD&D 1/e are not fundamentally different from D&D
> > HPs in 2003.
> 
>     Mechanically, they *operate* the same (damage is subtracted from hit
> points) - but the system behind the mechanics has been upgraded and made
> more coherent

No, they have been simplified and made less coherent.
 
>     (a) claim that you don't need to read 3E because it uses the same system
> as 1E and therefore has the same "obsolete" mechanics and is therefore
> worthy of mockery
>     (b) simultaneously claim that 1E had the "best" explanation of hit
> points.

There is not a contradiction between these two things, assuming you
add "... in the AD&D line." to (b).
 
>     What *I* see is that 1E is the ONLY VERSION YOU HAVE READ

I have read the 2/e PHB and DMG and used large parts of them in play.
I have read through selected parts of 3.x, primarily by way of the
SRD.

> and therefore
> it is the "best" version for *you* because you can't understand a system any
> more sophisticated

So GURPS is less sophisticated than D&D 3.x? That's the stupidest
thing you've implied in quite some time.

Brandon



<-- __Chronological__ --> <-- __Thread__ -->


Usenet.com



Please check out one of the premium Usenet Newsgroup Service Providers below for access to Usenet.