Just in time for Halloween?

[captain_slinky]

CLICK HERE FOR STEVEN SEGAL'S ASIAN EXPERIANCE LIGHTNING BOLT ENERGY DRINK

This is by far the most horrifying drink experience I can think of. First of all, wtf is Steven Segal's "Asian Experience"? Two cans of Sopporo and a Phillipino hooker? Why would I want to drink something that tastes like that?

And really, I can think of SEVERAL cheesy action stars I would rather drink the juices of so I could gain their power.

• Chuck Norris (Walker Texas Ranger Red Raspberry Iced Tea)
  
• Ralph Machio (Karate Kid Kooler)
  
• Jackie Chan (JackieChanInnaCan)
  
• Jean Claude VanDamme (Bloodsportorade)
  
• Dolph Lundgren (Universal Soda)
  
• Kurt Russell (Escape From Dehydration and/or Snake Pliskenergy)

The list could go on and on! But Steven Segal?!?!? I'm just... I can't even put in to words that make sense!

Comments

[owldragon1.livejournal.com]

What? No comment on my gaming history? I hope it was just a lack of something to say that stayed commentary, and not my negative view of 2nd edition that did it.

[captain-slinky.livejournal.com]

I just need to get beyond it... not *everyone* is as enlightened and forgiving as I am when it comes to 2nd ed...

[owldragon1.livejournal.com]

I may not always be open minded, but I try, so maybe with your enlightenment about it, you can help explain why my key complaints about 2nd edition are either invalid or unimportant? Please? :)

(I hate hating a game system, but I've never gotten over my feelings about 2nd, maybe it's time for that)

The first complaint is that while it changed rules, and didn't necessarily make much worse, it didn't fix any of the primary problems from 1st ed, at least not very well.

A good example is the non-weapon proficiency system, while it was compiled and re-organized, it was still clumsy and awkward in functionality. I'm told this was 'fixed' when Skills and Powers came out, but that was so far into the years of second edition and so recent relatively speaking, that I'd hardly even heard of it before 3rd hit the shelves, and it sold so poorly that I still haven't managed to get a copy in my hands long enough to see if I like how they did things.

Another example is the thief/rogue/whatever abilities. By giving them points, it got around one of the big problems of 1st edition, allowing you to specialize, and not forcing you into abilities you don't want or use (I've never once played a pickpocket for instance, I never used the ability even when I could). But, crunching the numbers on the math, even if I completely ignored one ability, my other abilities were rarely as good as they were in 1st.

And my other key complaint about second, is that they sold so much pointless crap that nobody could buy it all, but I'd constantly run into people who'd bought things they wanted to use, even though I ran a 1st edition game. This was especially annoying when they wanted to be a remake of Tanis or Drizzt, since my elves were based on what info I had from early Greyhawk, and if I let them play those characters with the players' expectations about the culture based on their own character backgrounds... it would change my elves into someone else's elves, and the only someone else I wanted influencing them was Gygax himself.

I still bitch about what Drizzt's existence did to rangers. They didn't dual wield in 1st edition, and I can't recall them ever dual wielding before that damned drow came along. Will I never be able to play a competent tracker again who's not obsessed with either dual wielding or archery? Maybe if I play a Scout, but then I have to deal with their bizarre pseudo sneak attack ability instead.

And honestly, that all boils down to this: when I had basic background information on which to build, I could grow it into a campaign, and have some real freedom. This also gave me freedom in other people's campaigns, since all I'd have to do is ask a few key questions about a handful of areas they hadn't yet developed, and I could shove any character idea I had into their world and make it fit comfortably. With 2nd ed, there was so much detailed info about everywhere and everything, that I had no freedom, I had to base what I did on what they wrote.

And all that is clearly illustrated by my complaint about the class books, where you could get detailed backgrounds for any way you might want to play a class, and get next to no advantage from playing your character that way. At least these days, if I want to get stuck in someone else's template, I get some advantages for using their prestige class design.

[captain-slinky.livejournal.com]

Sorry, I *tried* to read your dissertation several times but failed. I'll try to get through it again tomorrow :)

[spazzychic.livejournal.com]

I like how we went from Steven Segal's juices to advanced rpg theory.

[owldragon1.livejournal.com]

Sometimes I annoy myself at how long winded I get when I let myself do so.

I managed to condense everything to a few simple sentences to someone else. (I was comparing this convo to another one in an online game, mere hours ago)

There I mentioned a shorthand theory on why I don't like 2nd ed and an idea on why so many others love it:

I like functionality of game mechanics, but never thought ease of use was all that important, while others seem to like the whole ease of use idea and don't care about the technical aspects at all. Oh well, I feel 3rd wins out over 1st and 2nd on both those points anyway.

[captain-slinky.livejournal.com]

Ah, MUCH easier!

3rd is my favorite, but Second is nice because as a DM if I decided that the story calls for monitoring how many potty breaks the party has to make during their trip to the dungeon? Most likely there's a tale to roll on for it, plus a cross-reference table to see what types of wandering monsters the smell of urine is most likely to atract :)

[owldragon1.livejournal.com]

So, the stuff I improvise is the same stuff you use charts and tables for? Eeenteresting.

While first had plenty of charts, I didn't use many of them, especially since they were so hard to find much of the time. (That was on page what of the DMG? Are you sure it's not from one of the Survival Guides?)

Third, plenty of straightforward info so you can roll dice when you feel like it, but don't always have to. (I don't have to roll to make arrows any more? Awesome!)

I guess since I'm now coming to realize (consciously anyway, it seems I always knew this subconsciously) that since the exact game rules aren't necessary to a fun game... I only have one remaining trouble with 2nd edition, and I guess it's not really the game itself:

90% of the people I've met who play solely 2nd are losers I don't want to game with.

But, really thinking on it, I've met plenty of losers playing every edition... Good gamers are a treasure to be prized, and nobody will ever agree on what truly makes a good gamer. ;)

[captain-slinky.livejournal.com]

Well here's the BIG difference between 2nd and 3rd to me: 2nd was a Game; 3rd is an RPG heavy on the RP.

2nd Ed has stacks upon stacks of rules for every situation and can be used to almost mathematically create an entire new lifeform on paper.

3rd Ed forgoes all that stuff in favor of creating a good, dramatic, entertaining adventure.

Both are great in their own ways to me!

[owldragon1.livejournal.com]

I find this take on 3rd hilarious, since that's exactly how I'd always viewed it, until someone in my current group pointed out the reason they always play things so combat heavy:

The combat rules are so detailed that it's practically a tabletop wargame. (and thus, he felt it was RP-light and combat heavy when compared to other current RPGs)

I guess it really does boil down to the players rather than the game itself! :)