77IM wrote:If you're happy with 2E, why would you bother re-purchasing the exact same material in 3E? If 3E is an improvement and the material for it is new and interesting, then wouldn't you be happy buying it?
I can understand being upset that there won't be any more 2E products, and being upset that it might be harder to find a 2E group to play with, but if you feel like you MUST buy all the new products for the new edition, the problem lies with you. I learned this lesson the hard way with D&D 3E -- I bought every single book, then when 3.5 came out, I felt like I had to buy them all again. Eventually I realized that I didn't need to -- I was happier buying only those books that I actually liked and used and enjoyed reading. By the time D&D 4E came out, I felt NO compulsion to buy every book -- I just got the core rules, plus a few extra books that specifically interested me. I suggest you try the same with M&M 3E.
-- 77IM
Yes, but that is the point...even if I like M&M3E, I must at least re-buy one book - the core rules. Also, since I'm the GM for the most part, other such books become more necessary. Another point concerning to the core rule book - there are going to be two versions of it. One for DC and one for the core M&M3E. Why ? If the both contain the same rules, why would anyone purchase both ? Doesn't this cost more for GR to print the same rules with different artwork ? Then in order to make them both viable products, don't the need to be differentiated by more than artwork ? And, if this is the case, then do I need both books to get " all " the rules ? I'm not saying each book wouldn't be a stand-alone product, I'm sure it is...but there are alot of unanswered questions here. As for your 4th Ed analogy, if you liked or played alot of Fighters, then you bought Sword & Fist, Complete Warrior and Martial Power - essentially the same book, 3 times! Maybe you bought less overall books, but still friggin annoying.
As for compatability, ability scores are now gone. You just use the modifiers, much like True20. I'm not a fan of this design. Yes, you cut out the middle man, but it is such an ingrained design element that I have been playing with for like 30+ years, its a design element I've always loved and trusted. Moving away from this is moving in a direction I'm not liking. You can say I have a 20 STR or a +5 Str. They both say the same thing, but on paper the 20 looks a hell of a lot more impressive. Also, my group and I use ability scores to help in decision making during a game, such as for Initiative. If 2 people roll the same number, the higher Dex goes. Same Dex ? Higher Int. cutting out those steps removes an increment that we found useful. YMMV.
.
