3e turned the game into something resembling a video game, being quite rules heavy, lots of bean counting that gets pretty tedious to track after a while, and the dungeonmaster is relegated a role that could almost be replaced by an automaton. I never cared for the way 2e handled specialization wizards, because most of them felt way too similar to eachother to be distinctive. The problem was even worse for clerics. In part this is because they didn't really try to consider that spells in different spheres or when cast by different specialists, should actually be set at a different level, and it's possible with some rather large changes to the class system and spell lists available to the appropriate classes, a good system could be created, but I never had the energy to devote to trying to do that. The psionics system in 2e was so overpowered as to be absurd, and the psionics system in 3e and beyond just feels like another magic spell list instead of anything particularly special.

The best edition of D&D was the first edition of AD&D, and I'm sticking to it.

Why is everyone doing 80 if the speed limit is only 45? And if the speed limit is 80, I would be moving at 80. If the speed limit is 50, I'd be doing 50 and not 45, unless the road conditions were pretty bad and warranted driving more slowly (icy or whatnot).

As all three of the accidents that I referred to were while my vehicle was stopped and *NOT* moving (and where I was even legally required to actually be stopped, at the time) I fail to see how any of those incidents would reflect on my driving skill. I can only conclude that you don't believe me.

It's the honest truth that in nearly 25 years of driving, I do not ever willfully speed... my default go-to card for an emergency is the brake, and not the accelerator or the steering wheel. This practice, which I have been doing ever since I first learned how to drive, has resulted in neither being in nor causing any accident while my vehicle was moving. It is possible that my habits may be partially overcompensating for my father, who used to speed quite a lot, but has also been in over a dozen different car accidents, many of which were his fault (he's actually a much safer driver lately, in all fairness). My mother, who does not speed, similar to myself, has never been in an accident where she was at fault in her life and has been driving for as many years as I've been alive.

But I wasn't even out to try and make any proclamations about how super-awesome a driver I am for trying to avoid speeding, or pointing out that I haven't had any accidents that were my fault... The only reason I even mentioned it is that some people here have this belief that everybody is going to willfully speed at some point in time or else they are a terrible driver. Terrible drivers, one would think, would probably have an accident history where at least some of the accidents were actually their fault. Unless you are alleging that neither myself nor my mother are not "people", this allegation is demonstrably false.

But hey.... I'll be sure to eat some crow if my "terrible driving" for following the posted speed limits actually ever causes any accidents.

I understand perfectly how the real world works, which is why I err on the side that will cost me the least amount of money if something unexpected happens. If that makes me an asshole, so be it..

I don't assume other drivers will drive safely, but I don't look both ways while passing through an intersection that has a steady green either, so I'm not going to notice a vehicle that is trying to run the red that I wouldn't have *ALSO* noticed approaching the intersection moments before I actually entered the intersection in the first place, and because I don't speed, I would have been able to make an emergency stop to avoid. Somebody else driving like a lunatic is not an excuse for me to endanger somebody else's life who may be in front of me.

As I don't floor the accelerator from a stopped position when starting at a green light, I highly doubt I would get up enough speed before I had cleared the intersection to even be going the speed limit, let alone faster. If I am approaching an intersection at speed that is already green and not in danger of turning yellow, in which case I will try to stop before reaching the intersection, Traffic moving perpendicular to my own vehicle that is moving fast enough that I would not be able to anticipate it before even entering the intersection in the first place will have been far enough from the intersection by the time I get there that I wouldn't see it in order to be aware that I had to speed up to avoid it anyways.

I can count on zero fingers the number of times that situation has ever arisen in my life, and spending time dealing with bizarre edge cases is a waste of time.

What's that quote from? I don't recognize it, but it sounds entertaining.

I live in an area where the greater metropolitan population is about 3 million people, and although I don't drive every single day (since because of where I work, it is easier if I take public transit to work than deal with parking), I still drive fairly frequently. I am admittedly considerably more adjusted to city driving than highway driving.

Truck, passenger, and school children be damned. When the self-driving car thinks a crash is imminent, it tries to stop. Period. End of philosophical rant about Asimov's laws, morality, and manufacturer's liability.

Yes... This. I can't believe how many people here are trying to argue that it should *EVER* be otherwise.

But you aren't held personally responsible for any negative consequences that result from following the law because they aren't actually your fault.

You are allowed to speed when overtaking (at least here).

Not legal where I live. If you can't overtake without speeding, then you shouldn't overtake.

You are certainly allowed to speed to get out of the way of an oncomming train

I'm trying to imagine a case where that would actually ever even happen unless you were driving stupidly. You'd have to be trying to deliberately race the train because the warning lights will give you plenty of notice to not try to cross in the first place.

If a driverless car can't speed up and drive (even off the road) to avoid collisions we will have a problem.

Or it could try... I dunno... slowing down, or perhaps even coming to a complete stop. Momentum equals velocity times mass... the slower the car is moving, the less damage that it will do (even if something else that is moving does more damage to it as a result).

The only time traveling faster than the limit will actually ever prevent an accident that could not otherwise be avoided is when the person behind me is following too closely for the speed that he is moving, which is *their* decision about how to control their own car, and not reflective of any decision I have made or how I am driving. I do not drive slower than the speed limit, but I do not speed either.

I do anticipate.... quite far in advance, actually (compared to most people that I know). My experience with other drivers is that so many of them are complete bastards about letting you change lanes in front of them (and the person behind them is no better, so slowing down doesn't help) that it's best to just get into the lane I know I will ultimately need to be in as early as I can safely do so, and stay there instead of only changing lanes a block or so before the turn, in case I am unable to safely negotiate the lane change at that time.

It would be most correct to say that I never willfully speed. I've caught myself doing so occasionally, and will ease up on the gas when I find it happening.

It's not that I do not trust the car to speed up, its the fact that when I do increase it, I am making my car a greater danger to others who are in front of me. Even with everything else being entirely equal, with increased speed comes a an increased amount of time it will actually take to bring the car to a complete stop in the event that something unexpected happens, and the damage that the car will do to somebody else will also be proportionally higher.

Some advocates of "speeding to keep up with traffic" would argue that I am unsafe driver, but I would challenge any of them to substantiate that allegation without making what is most almost invariably a false assumption about my own personal driving record.

I'm 50 now, and I've been driving for almost half of that, my driving has caused exactly zero accidents. The worst infraction I've ever had is I received a parking ticket one time for being parked on a street outside of the hours that it was allowed at that location. But that incident doesn't reflect on my driving either.

If everyone is going 75 and it is 55 zone. You decide to drive 55 and just you. *YOU* are the unsafe driver. You can be ticketed accordingly in many places. Usually reckless or impeding traffic or both. The cops then just go 'fishing' and catch a driver here an there and generate revenue. However, you would be an easy mark.

I do not live in a jurisdiction where such things are legal. An argument that I was actually traveling at the speed limit where everyone else was going faster would be thrown out of court, and the cop probably charged.