Better buy:2e or 3e?

If you can't find a forum for it, talk about it here.
Jabroniville
Posts: 9618
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:05 pm

Re: Better buy:2e or 3e?

Post by Jabroniville » Fri Nov 10, 2017 8:36 am

Yeah, I didn't like the pointless name-changes. Why turn "Create Object" into "Create"? The changing of the Drawbacks/Flaws system was REALLY stupid, because the whole "Flat -1 Flaw" thing is awkward. The "Extras" are the same- that's why my thread consistently uses the old terminology. It was irritating and "Change for the sake of change", which is the worst part of 3e.

And yeah, I forgot how 2e Combat tended to go until someone got stunned, at which point the other guy Power Attacked and won.

I must prefer 3e's Complications rather than putting somewhat-arbitrary numbers on a guy's Weaknesses (because those could not POSSIBLY come up every adventure).

I'd say ideally I could get by with 3e with two-tier Skill Pricing. As a builder first and foremost, I dig Affliction, though admittedly the Snares thing is annoying, and I constantly have to re-read my notes to make sure I'm getting all the aspects of it right... and I have to ratchet on 2e's unique Feats for it as well, like "Tether".

One of the more odd things about 3e is that it didn't even fix some of the issues with 2e, like the infamous "cheap Concealment".

The granularity the Skills is admittedly a thing, but like I said- the "Limited" Flaw still works. But a simple "Technology" both fits comics a little better (where if you're smart, you can do everything), and makes it easier on poor builders like me. Oh GOD was building 2e Skillmonkeys a chore...

User avatar
Woodclaw
Posts: 748
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:05 pm
Location: Como, Italy

Re: Better buy:2e or 3e?

Post by Woodclaw » Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:34 am

I know I've a reputation of being a grognard that sticks to 2e and, in fact, it's true, but over the years I've come to terms with most of the 3e elements.

My general feeling is that both systems have their pro and con. There are elements that are better in 2e, other that are better in 3e and some that neither system got right.

Abilities

This is one of those elements that neither system did right in my mind. I like the fact that 3e got rid of the D20 double stat system, but why in hell they decided it was a good idea to incorporate combat value straight into the general abilities? Also I resent the fact that melee attack and defense are based on two different stats, while ranged combat use a single stat, making it way cheaper.

Skills

I think that Jab summed it up perfectly: 2e system is better for human-level characters, 3e system is better for superheroes. Way back when 3e came out someone (I think it was IK) said that one of the big problem with the new skill system was that many characters became skilled in areas that they weren't supposed to because each new skill was too broad. I agree with this sentiment, but if we look at thesource material is this really a bad thing? very often superheroes (especially those of super-scientist persuasion) are versed in tons of disciplines that in the real world would take ages to master.
My current tastes have moved away from simulation games a bit, so I'm more than willing to say that 3e approach might be better, but only just.

Feats/Advantages

Not much to say here, I don't think there are too many significative changes.

Powers

Of course this is the big deal and I believe that in many cases 3e did a better job: Affliction and the new handling of Containers are way better than their 2e equivalents, but there are some unresolved issues. In general I think that neither system did a good job with size-changing powers, especially Growth is terrible to balance in both system.

Power Modifiers

I'm sorry but it's very clear: 2e did it better. Not only the separation Feats/Extras/Flaws/Drawbacks worked better, but some extras like Impervious and Penetrating were easier to use.

Drawbacks/Complications

Okay, at first this was the big deal for me, I just didn't like the idea of giving Hero Points for things like being blind or in a wheelchair because it turned a disadvantage into a perk. It felt very open to exploitation. Also I always considered Complications something that it was mostly linked to roleplaying your character, limitations set up by the player for the sake of the story. For example, Superman refusing to kill Luthor in spite of all he has done it's a perfect example: killing would be easier, but it would go against the character, so here is your Hero Point. Giving point for elements that can't be properly conveyed RPing still feel wrong to me.

Combat
HArd to say who did it better, but I think that the general consensus is that 3e fixed most of the 2e bugs, with one glaring exception: grappling. Neither system did it right: it was overpowered in 2e and it's underwhelming in 3e.
"You're right. Sorry. Holy shit," I breathed, "heckhounds.”

WareHouse W (main build thread for M&M)

Ken
Posts: 2019
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:40 pm
Location: DeKamore, Madiganistan

Re: Better buy:2e or 3e?

Post by Ken » Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:42 pm

FuzzyBoots wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 3:30 am
The layout of the 3E book was confusing unless you already had knowledge of 2E.
That, with all due respect, is bullshit.

Speaking for a group of players who had never played 2e, and in fact, most of us had never looked at 2e, we have found the layout of the book just fine.


As someone who played Champions for a couple of decades, because we never found a system that did super heroes better, I found 3e to be as close to perfect a game system as we ever found. It's straight forward enough that character building is fast, and game play is fast. It simulates comic book heroes really well, particularly the notion of heroes that are really powerful and heroes that are human and skilled being on the same team.

Yes, the skills are broad. This helps with "genre simulation", and it helps prevent character building from getting bogged down. And if one wants to specialise his or her skills, it's easy enough to have a power "Expert Driver: Enhanced Vehicles +8, limited to land vehicles" and the like.

I keep seeing people whine about Impervious and Penetrating. I have no idea why, again, coming in as someone who never got past the 2e Double ability or triple score headache, I have no idea what Impervious and Penetrating did in 2e. But as someone who came into 3e direct, I find that Impervious does what it does (let tough characters ignore minor attacks) just fine, and Penetrating gets past it.

Yes, at the end of the day, 2e M&M is better at being 2e M&M than 3e M&M will even be.

And if you want a "super hero" game system that does a good job of making lots of different types of skilled humans that don't look kind of "samey" 3e isn't the game for you.
Does a Winnie poo in the 100-acre wood?

FuzzyBoots
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:20 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Better buy:2e or 3e?

Post by FuzzyBoots » Fri Nov 10, 2017 3:44 pm

Ken wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:42 pm
FuzzyBoots wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 3:30 am
The layout of the 3E book was confusing unless you already had knowledge of 2E.
That, with all due respect, is bullshit.

Speaking for a group of players who had never played 2e, and in fact, most of us had never looked at 2e, we have found the layout of the book just fine.
You know how the saying goes. Opinions are like anuses. Everyone has one and they're certain theirs doesn't stink. :)

I don't have firsthand experience reading the 3e book as the first experience, but I was there fielding questions after it got released. The number of people trying to figure out damage saves and being confused why it wasn't in the section on combat was one that stuck out to me. Other than that... it's been over six years, so I can't really say, and I'm too lazy to track down the threads in the old Atomic Think Tank.

Jabroniville
Posts: 9618
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:05 pm

Re: Better buy:2e or 3e?

Post by Jabroniville » Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:56 pm

heh- that part screwed me up, too. I kept looking for the Damage Save section when I was playtesting, and couldn't find it! Because they shoved it under the "DAMAGE" power! Not in combat!

MacynSnow
Posts: 3185
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2016 2:56 pm

Re: Better buy:2e or 3e?

Post by MacynSnow » Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:45 pm

Jabroniville wrote:
Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:56 pm
heh- that part screwed me up, too. I kept looking for the Damage Save section when I was playtesting, and couldn't find it! Because they shoved it under the "DAMAGE" power! Not in combat!
That's why i always use the Almighty Index Page when looking for my stuff... :)

Post Reply