NationStates Jolt Archive

[Moderator Edit - Cogitation] These posts were split from here (http://www.forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=419771). [/modedit]

Popular in the seventies? Hell, I was born in the seventies! Arr! Bring 'em on! Take that you orc! Take that you ogre! Take that you fraggle! None can stand before the power of my +1 longsword, 10 foot pole, and iron spikes! If you think racism is bad now, just wait till you're in a world where fungus can be sentient!

But the endless violence got me down, so I joined a strike team of cognitive therapists that would storm dungeons, psychoanalyse orcs, and encourage them to challenge their irrational beliefs that held then back from self-actualization and encourage them to end their abusive co-dependant relationships with dark lords.

THERAPIST: You can't spend your whole life in a 10 foot by 10 foot room you know. You've got to get out there and enjoy life.
UNDEAD GHOUL: But nobody likes me!
THERAPIST: You mean you won't let anybody like you. When was the last time you gave anybody a chance to relate to you before you ate their brains?

D&D rules...I've been a player and DM for about 20 years...

1st/2nd edition forever - 3rd ed. sucks! WOTC is the anti-Christ! :p

First edition is best. It all went downhill when they made different races. Elf, Dwarf, and Halfling are Classes and anyone who says different is a heretic!
Plus the absurdly low probabilities for thief skills.

Thief: Well, I can try to open the chest and almost certainly fail or the fighter here can just bash it open with his big-ass sword.

Fighter: *Bashes*

Mage: What's with all the blood?

Cleric: It appears the Princess we came to rescue is in the chest.

Thief: No, the Princess was in the chest. Now, halves of the pincess are in halves of the chest.

AD&D 1st ed. Hobbits are a race. one race, not three. ditto for elves. the Bard class should be earned, demihumans have Psi powers too. and NO &#*^ PLASMA RIFLES!!!!!
WOTC was okay, until they sold it to Hasbro.

Ugh I feel old.

Hmmm now where did I put my copies of Chainmail and the worlds of grey hawk?

If I had enough time and not a lingering feeling of self-doubt, I'd totally start playing D&D.

[Goblin1]: Do you they think they will fight us?
[Goblin2]: Dont think so. Look at the size of them, they are even smaller than us.
[Goblin1]: you are right. thay would not dare attack us with us having dummie here.
[Ogre]: Me not dummie.
WHACK
The ogre falls
[Halfling1]: That was a good shot. But watch this.
The Goblins look at each other in dismay.
WHACK, WHACK
Both the Goblins fall.
[Halfling2]: You took them both out with one shot. :o

Halflings rule. All will fall before the might of the Halflings.

(Goblins dont talk like that but i thought it would be easier to understand)

I roll a d100 and it turns out I am completely indifferent to this matter.

I started with 3rd edition, and it rocks! I've played 2nd edition before and I didn't understand it; negative AC? What the $%*# is that!!!

I started with 3rd edition, and it rocks! I've played 2nd edition before and I didn't understand it; negative AC? What the $%*# is that!!!

Usually cursed items. Easier to hit and damange you.....

Usually cursed items. Easier to hit and damange you.....

Either that or the anti-intuitive scale where AC 10 is the worst, and AC -10 is the best.

Usually cursed items. Easier to hit and damange you.....
:confused: Isn't lower AC better? As in, you don't get hit as often?

:confused: Isn't lower AC better? As in, you don't get hit as often?

Since AC stands for armourclass, I consider "the higher the better" more logical. And it should reduce damage done to you when you get hit, not increase your chances to dodge (which would be another stat ;))

But logic is not always present in some D&D manuals :(

Since AC stands for armourclass, I consider "the higher the better" more logical. And it should reduce damage done to you when you get hit, not increase your chances to dodge (which would be another stat ;))

But logic is not always present in some D&D manuals :(

Don't go there. Once you try and fix the way AC works and make it actually reduce damage rather than just acting as an either/or when it comes to get hit, then you will be wanting to have a HP system which actually makes some kind of sense.

Either that or the anti-intuitive scale where AC 10 is the worst, and AC -10 is the best.

Ah what.....re-reads. Man I should read before I post! Thanks for catching that.....

I DM a Swedish version based loosely on the D&D system. There armor is actually used to absorb damage. So if a character wearing a chain mail (Abs 5) gets hit with a sword for 7 damage, he takes 2 damage.

Also, in my system HP is a fixed stat that (almost) never changes, so a character usually has about 12-16 hp throughout the campaign. What's even more interesting is that damage is calculated for each body part (a character with 12 hp has 4 hp in each arm, for example).

I DM a Swedish version based loosely on the D&D system. There armor is actually used to absorb damage. So if a character wearing a chain mail (Abs 5) gets hit with a sword for 7 damage, he takes 2 damage.

Also, in my system HP is a fixed stat that (almost) never changes, so a character usually has about 12-16 hp throughout the campaign. What's even more interesting is that damage is calculated for each body part (a character with 12 hp has 4 hp in each arm, for example).

Sounds pretty like the Runequest/Basic Role Playing model then - one which I found made a lot more sense.

Sounds pretty like the Runequest/Basic Role Playing model then - one which I found made a lot more sense.


Now that's a name I haven't heard for awhile. Hmmm Rune Lords, Priests and Heros. ;)

I liked the magic system better as well. You had to be skilled at certain levels to do things such as reattching limbs.....

Sounds pretty like the Runequest/Basic Role Playing model then - one which I found made a lot more sense.

Always liked that better than D&D.

(Old school player here. "B2 Keep on the Borderlands was cool when it came out" old school.)

But I always liked the various home brewed rules my old main group used. We played D&D, AD&D, EPT, Arduin, Traveller, T2K, and a twisted version of Shadowrun (heavily inflanced by Dark Conspiracy and CoC). I don't think we ran a single straight published rules variant. I GMed the last three, and Traveller was the only one that I GMed more or less book rules.

[Moderator Edit - Cogitation] These posts were split from here (http://www.forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=419771). [/modedit]

Popular in the seventies? Hell, I was born in the seventies! Arr! Bring 'em on! Take that you orc! Take that you ogre! Take that you fraggle! None can stand before the power of my +1 longsword, 10 foot pole, and iron spikes! If you think racism is bad now, just wait till you're in a world where fungus can be sentient! *snip*

Take that you fraggle?

Like Gobo Fraggle (http://www.fragglerocker.com/info/characters.asp?chrName=Gobo)

Boy, I say, what ... I say, what is your malfunction? :D

I remember playing D&D (1st).
I knew every single monster from the manuals by heart, red, blue, green, black and golden manual. Name, AC, HP/HD, number of attacks, damage, special abilities, XP if killed, treasure class, probability of appearence. Everything.
T'must have been about the time, er, black powder was invented.
We didn't have electricity those days, did we? :rolleyes:

The golden manual, also known as "The powergamers wet dream" was sooooo bad i regretted even looking at it. But back then i collected the stuff and thus had to have it. :headbang:

Cromotar
AD&D(second edition) as well as D&D 3.0/3.5 have some damage reduction in them(my cleric of pelor for example was the just about the only one in the partyt able to hurt a certain undead monster because he was one of the few party members able to get past the creatures damage reduction), but the way the damage is added up in D&D. it makes more sense from a game masters satandpoint figuring in HP, size modification, dodge bonus, armour etc.. to use the D&D system. since D&D damage is not specific the GM can play around with how it affect the character. for instance if a monster of some villinous foe hit me with a crit and took me down to say 1 HP the GM could make the wound as interesting as he see's fit. if you go by realistic wounding and said villian takes of my head...well it wouldn't matter how much damage he did to my HPs because realistically i would be dead.

parduna
We didn't have electricity those days, did we?
oh yes we did, we also interacted with other people in the flesh, actually "role played" a character, and used our brain a bit more because of the random stuff the GM could throw at us. none of which you can do playing psudo RPG computer games like final fantasy.
;)

We didn't have electricity those days, did we? :rolleyes:

We had Lightning Bolt as a third level magic-user spell and that was quite enough electricity, thank you very much.

Take that you fraggle?

Like Gobo Fraggle

Boy, I say, what ... I say, what is your malfunction?

I had no choice! After Mokey spurned my hand in marriage, rightfully granted to me by the great council of fraggles, there was no choice but to engage in a bloody civil war. Ah, Gobo was a mighty fraggle, but he was led astray by the pessermism of Boober, and allowed himself to be betrayed by my right hand fraggle, Wembly, and thus Gobo fell before the might of my Vicar's machine gun mounted on the back of the three seater bicycle which I had borrowed from the Goodies.

I still keep in touch with Mokey. She's living on a woman's commune somewhere with Red. They're good for each other.

"Those were the days my friends we thought they'd never end.."

Sigh... Little black box with tacky die that you had to color in with a crayon, three small books and complete and utter hysteria when the first real manuals came out.

Back when it was Monsters! Monsters! not an E Gary insight...

We had Lightning Bolt as a third level magic-user spell and that was quite enough electricity, thank you very much.

and my crazy mage did one without enough room for bounce back and fried himself...

we also interacted with other people in the flesh, actually "role played" a character, and used our brain a bit more because of the random stuff the GM could throw at us. none of which you can do playing psudo RPG computer games like final fantasy.

Role Play the only way to game!

Most of the kids now days have no idea of what they are missing!

Cromotar
AD&D(second edition) as well as D&D 3.0/3.5 have some damage reduction in them(my cleric of pelor for example was the just about the only one in the partyt able to hurt a certain undead monster because he was one of the few party members able to get past the creatures damage reduction), but the way the damage is added up in D&D. it makes more sense from a game masters satandpoint figuring in HP, size modification, dodge bonus, armour etc.. to use the D&D system. since D&D damage is not specific the GM can play around with how it affect the character. for instance if a monster of some villinous foe hit me with a crit and took me down to say 1 HP the GM could make the wound as interesting as he see's fit. if you go by realistic wounding and said villian takes of my head...well it wouldn't matter how much damage he did to my HPs because realistically i would be dead.

Not familiar with the later rules. Did damage reduction come from AC or was it another bit of crome tacked on later?

oh yes we did, we also interacted with other people in the flesh, actually "role played" a character, and used our brain a bit more because of the random stuff the GM could throw at us. none of which you can do playing psudo RPG computer games like final fantasy.
;)


Role Play the only way to game!

Most of the kids now days have no idea of what they are missing!

Bingo. That's one reason I drifted into other systems. D&D focused too much on the dungeon crawl for my tastes.

Bingo. That's one reason I drifted into other systems. D&D focused too much on the dungeon crawl for my tastes.
thats really the GMs fault not the game system. there are hack/slash type games, then there are thinking games with almost no fighting, combinations there of and sometimes you may never set foot in a "dungeon" type setting, depending on the scenerio the game is set in.

:cool:

Complaining about the game system itself is like complaining to Chevrolet when some idiot drives his Corvette into a tree. The whole point to being a DM/GM is to adapt the rules to your liking and desired levels of realism/fantasism. Many modules had large portions dedicated to the non-hack-and-slash aspect. The most notable was for 2nd Edition and was a module crafted to resemble Alice In Wonderland.

I've been fortunate to have a DM for the last 20 years or so who has allowed things like this:

My party was sent in to kill a marauding vampire. Through sleuthing and information gathering, we tracked him down and were on the verge of coup-de-grace (after losing one fighter to level drain and a bard to outright exsanguination), when the fanged bastard turned himself to vapor and was fixing to flee. My ranger had acquired a frostbrand sword during the campaign, and I had the idea that since my character had seen metal tankards "sweat" when filled with cold ale, I'd have him try to activate the icy blade in the midst of the newly formed vampire cloud in order to condense him on to my sword.

After discussion about the blur this caused in the line between player knowledge and character knowledge (not to mention a few tense Intelligence and Dexterity checks and assigning a probability of success on a d%, which I made), my DM allowed the novel idea to work. I condensed the vampire and let him run off the tip of my blade into an empty potion bottle.

To balance this rather unorthodox move, my DM then had the people offering the reward become very skeptical about my "vampire in a bottle", imagining that we were scamming them with colored water. When we offered to wait around a few days to prove that the attacks would have ceased, they grew even more suspicious, thinking that we'd made a deal with the bloodsucker to save our own skins (since all others sent to kill the thing had never returned) and were going to split the reward with him. When we pointed out that money is not a very big concern for the undead, the town council got angry and had us run out with no reward AND confiscated the bottle for "study."

This incident led to an entire off-book campaign in which we told our tale to the regional adventuring guild and led to my group forming a mercenary army to blockade the town until we were paid. My party's players got to learn all about raising a small army, recruitment, politics, labor unions, all within the D&D milieu. We had a blast! The story ended (and we went on in the actual originally crafted adventure) with our picketing army arriving to demand our due, but the town we came to was strangely quiet. Pale corpses were everywhere. It seems that an inquisitive child had been lured by the still-sentient vampire's telepathic cries for help from the bottle (we all know how persuasive Nosferatu can be). The child "freed" the "genie" and was but the first in a one-night binge of revitalizing meals for the starving vampire and his friends (who had returned to his original lair and went searching).

So you see, you can take the game as it comes, or you can make it your own. I highly recommend the latter. Spice to taste.

Reminds me of the time I squeezed an entire fraggle into a bottle.

i have played many systems including gamaworld,gerps,LOTR,etc. AD&D is my favorite. i found 3rd edition to be to heavy and complicated. i guess its what you get used to. they keep changing it to try and keep it fresh(keep it alive) but they should stop now. 3rd edition was a real disapointment. and its way too much like starwars with the skills and feats crap. i used to use both 1st and second edition in my world,which is not a module,but is open ended and constantly changing(like the real world). i havent played since i got married. i looked through the 3rd edition books and promptly decided that i wouldnt be using it any time soon...if ever.

things i feel got better in second edition:

new spells

new way to generate thieves. it allows for greater control over how you gain your skills and allows you to specialize. also have better weapon choices.

specialized mages. this makes perfect sense. i thought the generic priests and mages of the past got tedius because everyone always ended up with the same spells.

DM. "now that you are lv5,you get your first lv 3 spell. which one to you want
to see if you can learn?"

player. "FIREBALL!"

if i had time to run a campaign,i would require any spellcasters to choose a
field of study(necromancy,illusion,conjuration,etc.)


things that got worse in second edition:

say goodbye to monks and assassins
demons removed from the monster manuals(damn paranoid holyrollers)
spells scaled back(no more machine gun magic missile attacks) it was always funny watching a monster(or player) get turned into swiss cheese by 20 magic missiles or get incinerated by a 20d fireball! lol
revamped bards became generic wussies(i agree,bard class should be earned)


this is why i used both 1st and 2nd editions simotaneously. want to play a psionic monk? go for it!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I started with 3rd edition, and it rocks! I've played 2nd edition before and I didn't understand it; negative AC? What the $%*# is that!!!"

if you stand nekked,you are ac10,as in you might as well have a bright red target painted on you. youre fodder! if you have ac-10(very rare,or should be) then bullets will bounce off your chest like superman. simple.

hp increases as you go up in level. this is due to a combination of increased skills and increased physical tolerance to punishment. if you spend all day training in the arts of war,you should be able to take more abuse than a scrawny banker,even if you are not wearing any armor. a lv 14 fighter will simply be tougher than a lv2 fighter,regardless of his equipment.

also,there is a certain amount of damage reduction in the first 2 editions:

1. armor type adjustment. a piece of chainmail will block more damage than
cloth,even if the cloth is magical and has the same AC as the chain.
certain weapons do more or less damage depending on the type of armor
you are wearing,REGARDLESS of your actual AC. example: a warhammer
may get a +2 against cloth and a -2 against platemail. armor type adjustments is an optional system in first edition rules.

2. types of damage. blunt,piercing,slashing,stunning blow,grappling,fist fighting,etc. certain types of damage will be reduced based on the circumstances. for example: if you are fighting in unarmed combat(boxing) the
damage you receive is actually just a percentage of the actual damage. if you take 20hp of damage,that may be enough to stun you or knock you out cold,but it prolly wont kill you because you actually only took 5 damage that must be healed,the rest will be gone when you wake up. as opposed to say piercing damage which would be actually 20 points of real damage,plus you continue to bleed away 1hp per round until you bandage or use magic healing.
so there is a type of damage reduction based on what weapon you are using,what type of attack you are doing,and what type of armor you are wearing. armor is meant to protect you from blows(blocks the hit)not make the blows less lethal. a spear can still pierce platemail if the warrior has the skills and knows where to strike. you can be wearing +7 platemail of awesome
studliness,but if the warrior stabs under your chin-guard and hits your throat because he knows where to strike,all the damage reducing armor in the world isnt going to stop a critical hit.....

*a former DM who hardly ever gives out permanent magic items except bags of holding,which EVERY player should have on him at all times. how else are you going to carry all that treasure out of the dungeon and lug it back to town without attracting every bandit in the valley???

3e's actually doing very well right now.

I just wish I had some people to play with around here... stupid conservative area...

Not familiar with the later rules. Did damage reduction come from AC or was it another bit of crome tacked on later?
DR comes in many forms and is generally a special ability of a particular monster. Werewolves, for example, have damage reduction 5/silver ( I may have the numbers wrong) meaning that only silver weapons do their full damage; anything else will do 5 HP less than the attacker rolled.

Just FYI.

Ive played D&D (or some other system) games that may as well have been called "A Day at an Inn". That is, we started out at the Inn and never got around to leaving. Some of those games were great and highly memorable. Get the right kind of group together and you can have fun regardless of the setting.

"This incident led to an entire off-book campaign in which we told our tale to the regional adventuring guild and led to my group forming a mercenary army to blockade the town until we were paid. My party's players got to learn all about raising a small army, recruitment, politics, labor unions, all within the D&D milieu. We had a blast! The story ended (and we went on in the actual originally crafted adventure) with our picketing army arriving to demand our due, but the town we came to was strangely quiet. Pale corpses were everywhere. It seems that an inquisitive child had been lured by the still-sentient vampire's telepathic cries for help from the bottle (we all know how persuasive Nosferatu can be). The child "freed" the "genie" and was but the first in a one-night binge of revitalizing meals for the starving vampire and his friends (who had returned to his original lair and went searching).

So you see, you can take the game as it comes, or you can make it your own. I highly recommend the latter. Spice to taste."

sounds like you had a good DM. hard to find. i have been a player in many campaigns,and only one DM was really creative and original. the rest stumbled akwardly through stale modules. blech!!! if i decide to use a module,i incorporate it into my world and add my own flair. i also like to create my own magic items as well as hybrid monsters which are often immune to spells and typical attack strategies. got to keep the veterans guessing...lol

--snip--
things i feel got better in second edition:

new spells

new way to generate thieves. it allows for greater control over how you gain your skills and allows you to specialize. also have better weapon choices.

specialized mages. this makes perfect sense. i thought the generic priests and mages of the past got tedius because everyone always ended up with the same spells.

if i had time to run a campaign,i would require any spellcasters to choose a
field of study(necromancy,illusion,conjuration,etc.)

things that got worse in second edition:

say goodbye to monks and assassins
demons removed from the monster manuals(damn paranoid holyrollers)
spells scaled back(no more machine gun magic missile attacks) it was always funny watching a monster(or player) get turned into swiss cheese by 20 magic missiles or get incinerated by a 20d fireball! lol
revamped bards became generic wussies(i agree,bard class should be earned)


this is why i used both 1st and 2nd editions simotaneously. want to play a psionic monk? go for it!

if you stand nekked,you are ac10,as in you might as well have a bright red target painted on you. youre fodder! if you have ac-10(very rare,or should be) then bullets will bounce off your chest like superman. simple.

also,there is a certain amount of damage reduction in the first 2 editions:

1. armor type adjustment. a piece of chainmail will block more damage than
cloth,even if the cloth is magical and has the same AC as the chain.
certain weapons do more or less damage depending on the type of armor
you are wearing,REGARDLESS of your actual AC. example: a warhammer
may get a +2 against cloth and a -2 against platemail. armor type adjustments is an optional system in first edition rules.

2. types of damage. blunt,piercing,slashing,stunning blow,grappling,fist fighting,etc. certain types of damage will be reduced based on the circumstances. for example: if you are fighting in unarmed combat(boxing) the
damage you receive is actually just a percentage of the actual damage. if you take 20hp of damage,that may be enough to stun you or knock you out cold,but it prolly wont kill you because you actually only took 5 damage that must be healed,the rest will be gone when you wake up. as opposed to say piercing damage which would be actually 20 points of real damage,plus you continue to bleed away 1hp per round until you bandage or use magic healing.
so there is a type of damage reduction based on what weapon you are using,what type of attack you are doing,and what type of armor you are wearing. armor is meant to protect you from blows(blocks the hit)not make the blows less lethal. a spear can still pierce platemail if the warrior has the skills and knows where to strike. you can be wearing +7 platemail of awesome
studliness,but if the warrior stabs under your chin-guard and hits your throat because he knows where to strike,all the damage reducing armor in the world isnt going to stop a critical hit.....


Uh -- most if not all of these adjustments, including the return of monks (standard class) and assassins (prestige class in the rogue field), are accounted for in 3rd Edition. Damage reduction, weapon/armor type adjustments, size differential adjustments, critical hits, subdual damage for non-lethal bar brawls, psionics, new spells, specialized mages (which includes a realistic prohibition of opposite-type spells: abjurists can't use evocation spells, etc.), specialized clerics (domains grant you extra spells depending upon which god you align with), buffed-up druids and bards, and a d20 system which renders obsolete the ridiculous and counter-intuitive negative-numeral AC (yes, I played 1st and 2nd Editions and had since about 1981 and I think d20 is infinitely superior). Add to that the DC (difficulty check) for skills and the variety of combinations with regard to feats, and you get a game that is very customizable and much less archaic than earlier editions.

We all have our preferences, though. In the end, it's that ability to make the game your own that is D&D's hallmark.

sounds like you had a good DM. hard to find. i have been a player in many campaigns,and only one DM was really creative and original. the rest stumbled akwardly through stale modules. blech!!! if i decide to use a module,i incorporate it into my world and add my own flair. i also like to create my own magic items as well as hybrid monsters which are often immune to spells and typical attack strategies. got to keep the veterans guessing...lol

Agreed!

I think a lot of players who became DMs just figured all it took was reading the boxed text right out of the module and rolling up a few monsters. I've been fortunate to have quality-obsessed DMs. We're talking into Warhammer 40K and paints-their-huge-army obsessed. Detail-oriented and committed to telling a good story. I'd love to have the kind of time and single-mindedness it truly takes to be an outstanding DM, but I teach. That takes most of my time...I kind of see myself as a DM of Education. planning my lessons, springing traps (quizzes) and arming my "party" with the weapons and skills of knowledge. And yes, by Moradin, that was really cheesy.

Cromotar
AD&D(second edition) as well as D&D 3.0/3.5 have some damage reduction in them(my cleric of pelor for example was the just about the only one in the partyt able to hurt a certain undead monster because he was one of the few party members able to get past the creatures damage reduction), but the way the damage is added up in D&D. it makes more sense from a game masters satandpoint figuring in HP, size modification, dodge bonus, armour etc.. to use the D&D system. since D&D damage is not specific the GM can play around with how it affect the character. for instance if a monster of some villinous foe hit me with a crit and took me down to say 1 HP the GM could make the wound as interesting as he see's fit. if you go by realistic wounding and said villian takes of my head...well it wouldn't matter how much damage he did to my HPs because realistically i would be dead.


The version I play is rather similiar; like I said the individual body parts have their own HP, so If a character takes 10 damage to the head they're pretty much dead. The thing I enjoy about the system I play is that it allows for a great deal of improvising on the DM's part while not bogging me down with loads of rules and calculations.

Being a DM for many years, I have reached the point when I no longer require any preparations before a session. I have the background story for the campaign and the rest I make up as I go along. This means that the world becomes dynamic and sort of gets a life of its own. It's also rather necessary because sometimes my players do the most unexpected things!

I can't believe a sequel is planned to that abortion of a D&D movie...

From my brief experience with 3.0/3.5 ed AD&D, it seems that the emphasis is on ROLL-play rather than roleplay - the game now more closely resembles a miniature based wargame than an RPG.

IMHO, the only good thing 3E/WOTC have brought to D&D is the "open license" concept, as opposed to the sometimes draconian proprietary attitudes of TSR.

...I'm such a D&D junkie, I seriously considered getting the TSR logo for my second tattoo :p

http://www.mathematik.uni-ulm.de/~ffischer/images/TSR-logo.jpg

1st Edition fighter: Meathead with a sword and armor

2nd Edition Fighter: Meathead with exotic sword and armor variants, who specilaizes and has a couple of unique abilities to distinguish him from other warriors

3rd/3.5 Edition Fighter: DEATHSPLATTER THE GREAT - due to exotic training, can enchant his own weapons with power, attack with his sword while doing a half-pike double back sommersault and doesn't have a speed ratable in feet per second, but in "squares"

1st Edition fighter: Meathead with a sword and armor

2nd Edition Fighter: Meathead with exotic sword and armor variants, who specilaizes and has a couple of unique abilities to distinguish him from other warriors

3rd/3.5 Edition Fighter: DEATHSPLATTER THE GREAT - due to exotic training, can enchant his own weapons with power, attack with his sword while doing a half-pike double back sommersault and doesn't have a speed ratable in feet per second, but in "squares"

An argument can be made that the sparsity of options given by !st edition forced players to concentrate on characterisation, rather than the munchkinization and power-gaming which the later 'crunchier' editions have presented.*






*Sad to say, the lack of options didn't lead to more interest in characterisation, but rather a monomaniacal focus on gaining XP, slaying things and getting magic items.

1st Edition fighter: Meathead with a sword and armor

2nd Edition Fighter: Meathead with exotic sword and armor variants, who specilaizes and has a couple of unique abilities to distinguish him from other warriors

3rd/3.5 Edition Fighter: DEATHSPLATTER THE GREAT - due to exotic training, can enchant his own weapons with power, attack with his sword while doing a half-pike double back sommersault and doesn't have a speed ratable in feet per second, but in "squares"
and on the flip side...

1st Edition Wizard: Spell slinger with a tome of magic spells.

2nd Edition Wizard: Spell slinger with lots of dangerous and various effect spells that can and do help out in a pinch.

3rd/3.5 Edition Wizard: Mr. Wizard. can cast Fireballs, Lighting Bolts, and various of other spells... and maybe... Maybe will drop one orc..

3rd/3.5 Edition Fighter: DEATHSPLATTER THE GREAT - ... and doesn't have a speed ratable in feet per second, but in "squares"

You are glossing over the fact that the speed of the 1st edition fighter was given in inches per round. Straightforward enough? Nope: those inches were to be read as feet. Thus a fighter able to move 10' a round was described as being able to move 10".

As if this wasn't strange enough, the ranges of missile weapons were also given in inches, but were to be read as feet when inside buildings, but yards when outside them...

Nowadays you can play computer games that keep track of feet, inches, spaces, +1 bonus for remembering to tie shoe laces etc. But I think that when you sit around the table with real people for a role playing game, it better to use a simple, fast moving system, that won't get bogged down in details. Then you'll have more time for the most fun part of role playing, which is bad acting and silly, in character, arguements.

ADVENTURER 1: You open open the door.
ADVENTURER 2: No, you open the door! I opened the door last time.
ADVENTURER 1: You did not! I opened the last two doors!
ADVENTURER 2: That was in the inn, you twisted midget! That doesn't count!
ORCS: Hey! Keep it down out there! We're trying to sleep in here!

Of course, this is not to everyone's taste...

ERrr, DnD is fine and all, but I enjoy electronic RPG's more.

*ducks*

WAIT before you kill me, and here me out.

Let me show you:

Pro's of DnD:
More customizable
The firstz0rz
No n00bs running around going "w00000000t! w00000000t! 1 just pwnz0rd t3h T0nbrey kinz0rzzzz!!!!"
Cons:
You need to get a bunch of geeky friends into one room for hours and hours.
boooooooooooring *snooze*
Its just you guys. No one else. Oh, and a bunch of imaginary characters in your head.

Pros of RPGs:
Pretty looking.
Japanese(well, most of 'em. Although, KOTOR is good and isn't japanese.)
Not just for uber-geeks.
Deep storylines(well, at least for Final Fantasy and KOTOR)
Cons:
Electricity costs cash.
-so does a $300 system
--so does a $50 game.
The same game, no matter how many times you re-play it(although some games, like KOTOR, change due to yer actions.)

Pros of MMORPGS:
Pretty looking.
Alot of other people to play with.
A huge map
t3h ph4t lewt.
Cons:
"1 r t3h pwnz0rzzzzzzz!!!
"ARRRRR! I DELEVELED AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!111!1!!"
"Crap, a goblin train! ZONE!!!!"
"I spend $14 a month for THIS crap?"

ERrr, DnD is fine and all, but I enjoy electronic RPG's more.

*ducks*

WAIT before you kill me, and here me out.

Let me show you...
Yep, but you're 100% right.
If you want to play a game where you get a character, earn levels, get cool abilities, search for and find treasure, and beat all kinds of blue out of the bad guys, well, yeah. Computer games rock. DnD is fun, but computer games do it better.
It's prettier, it's faster moving, it's more exciting, and you can play it whenever you feel like it.

There are some things pen and paper games just can't do as well.

But, as I play both, I see them as entirely different types of games. The DnD games (actually we play Exalted) are much more social. There are plots like "your smuggler friend gets you to look after a package while he's away for a few weeks. The "package" turns out to be the kidnapped son of an important noble, who thinks you're his rescuer. And wants to be treated as a noble should, while you're trying to keep him thinking you're his rescuer, while dodging his actual would-be rescuers, while trying to get in contact with your friend, who doesn't want to loose his reputation as a smuggler...but at the same time you know you should be taking the kid back to his parents, as is your duty".
That's not the sort of story that you can easily have in a computer game, certainly not with all the possible responses the player could give. That was my game last night, it was great fun.

Then again, I don't get the same buzz from winning a combat in Exalted or D&D that I do when I fire up my xbox.

They're different games. I've seen players use online games like a pen & paper session, and I've seen players play a dungeon-hack like it was a computer game. It works, kinda. But isn't as fun.