jameson (ST) Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 I've been pondering this for some time now, converting Indigo from 2e M&M to 3e, but I still haven't come to a decision yet. I'd like some feedback from you all. Real feedback. If yes, then WHY yes? If no, then WHY no? Just saying yes, or no, or even "I don't like 3e" doesn't help me. So please feel free to list the reasons, give me your pros, or your cons, or both, if you have both. For my part ...Pros: Simpler, more streamlined system. The removable of "stun lock" from combat, the easier to use Master Rank table. Cons: I'd need to mod the damage & recovery system backward, some possible loss in scope of powers (range/size mostly), time spent converting PCs to the new system.I'd like to hear from everybody just so I can see where you all stand before I make a final choice.Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velocity Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 I must confess I didn't have much time thinking about this over the weekend so my answer may sound random or even erratic.Anyway - why do I prefer 3e?Mostly because I don't need an Ultimate Powers book or some other supplement to compliment all kinds of flavors you can get with M&M.3e pretty much unified this by generalizing some of their powers and making them more like a toolbox with different alternatives as examples. I sometimes struggle with that concept too, I must confess since I'm not that "deep" into the entire creativity thing concerning the use of powers. Most of my builds are very straight forward and only later on I realize what I could've done better or how I could've realized an idea which I thought was not possible to do in the first place.With some help and feedback though, you can truly create incredibly fun and versatile PCs.The other thing I like better is what Jameson already mentioned - the Master Rank table which keeps scale unified over the entire spectrum. That has the side-effect of reducing the scale of some powers which many mourn as "huge nerfs" but I do strongly support this change because it helps maintaining balance.I'm GMing two M&M 3e games (and I suck at rules) and I must honestly confess it hasn't done any harm. I think the change in combat rules alone makes it worth porting over it since the stun rules are changed.One more argument I'd like to add - I trust Jameson to handle this as superbly as he has done in the past with 2e. Things will be fair and won't reduce our ability to roleplay.I'm pro 3e. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telluris Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 I thought about it long and hard for awhile, and I eventually came down on the side of 3e.True, the scope of some of Rob's powers will be nerfed as they stand, but I think the necessary redesign will actually leave him closer to how I conceived of him. He was my first M&M design, and I think I made a number of errors in the build. For one thing, if we switch to 3e he might actually be able to walk and chew gum at the same time, magnetically speaking.I vote 'Aye'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SalmonMax Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 I'm good with 3e. It's a little simpler, and therefore plays a little faster, than 2e, and its design is more refined. Generally, when given a choice between 2e and 3e, I find myself coming down on 3e's side. This is no exception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jameson (ST) Posted March 28, 2011 Author Share Posted March 28, 2011 Thanks for the feedback guys. I want to hear from everybody else as well before I make a final choice, but so far there is obviously a clear indication of the group's direction/preference already forming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tharra of the Katjaa Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Ooops! I'm really sorry, meant to respond here just after you first put up this thread. For fun, I already did most of a conversion for Jordan/Tiresias - it wasn't perfect, but I still like the tidiness of 3e over 2e, so I'd be willing to convert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin OOC Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 I personally don't like 3e but I can see the way things are going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SalmonMax Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Justin, just out of curiosity...not trying to challenge you...what about 3e bugs you so much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jameson (ST) Posted March 28, 2011 Author Share Posted March 28, 2011 I haven't made a choice one way or the other yet. I asked at the beginning that people provide feedback to explain their answer.Originally Posted By: jameson (ST)Real feedback. If yes, then WHY yes? If no, then WHY no? Just saying yes, or no, or even "I don't like 3e" doesn't help me. So please feel free to list the reasons, give me your pros, or your cons, or both, if you have both. I want to know what people dislike AND like about 3e before I make a choice. The more information I'm given the better I can do my job as GM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z012 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 I like the tidiness of 3e, much like everyone else has said. I have Hero Builder to help me make the character, though, and that's a huge plus for converting in my book. I'm fine either way, but I'd lean towards converting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin OOC Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Perhaps it's the powergamer in me still (it probably is) But I hate the unilateral drawdown in scope. It's hard to put the rest into words, but system itself just feels like they left things out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z-Isaac Ward Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 I felt that way, too, but have come to like the ease it brings to building things. Instead of 8 different powers all with one thing that makes them a little different, you have Affliction.That said - I'm not going to care either way. We've had fun with 2e and would continue to have fun. We'll have fun with 3e. The system has never been as important to me (as a player) as the story. I'd say that whatever makes Jim's life easiest is what gets my vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jameson (ST) Posted March 28, 2011 Author Share Posted March 28, 2011 OK, I think everybody has replied in at least some form or another. There seems to be a fairly heavy lean toward 3e, but not unilateral. I'm going to leave this open and if you guys want to debate the pros and cons in greater depth I'll be more than willing to read them. In the meantime I need to consider what you all have said and make a final choice. I will state that I will not be further house ruling 2e. I'd rather apply the one or two house rules I feel 3e would need (including damage & healing) than to houserule up from 2e as I feel this would be more work and create a messier whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.