Search results

Uhm... but older editions of D&D did/do cater to low magic play. I'm not sure what you're expecting here, it's a forum... you posted and I commented my thoughts... to which I received alot of unnecessary snark and hostility I feel like because I dared to question your take. Well if you don't...

Yeah I'm going to step away from this convo... apparently my questions have in some way offended you (Or you've just decided to take a hostile tone) so since I was asking mostly out of curiosity, I'm good on going further with this line of discussion. Have a nice day. Edit: Also you might...

I think the question then becomes... were you and your players desires aligned? I wonder this whenever I see a DM who is dissapointed that the game does not force incentivize a player into roleplaying But was that the type of game your players wanted? You keep speaking from your wants or...

Ah ok, yeah I sometimes forget many people don't have stable groups... I've been gaming with my core group of players since we were kids and it's given me the ability to be able to play many various games even though our staple is still the D&D long form campaign.

Do you only play D&D? I think this is a weird sentiment for me because while I run D&D more than any other rpg... we do intersperse our groups play with other ttrpg's. I think if all I played was D&D I'd be bored in 10years as well... but I feel like that would be true of any other ttrpg as well.

I actually think the '24 PHB is a much better book for new players than the '14...in fact I think the '24 corebooks in general are a better onramp into 5e than the '14 books were. Organization, examples, layout, & reference usability are all improved. Edit: I also think there's quite a few DM's...

It sounds like you wanted a reprint with eratta... not a revised edition. Edit: This is basically what later printings of the core '14 books already were... outside of new art you had this already.

I'm still unclear on what your idea of backwards compatibility entails. Can you explain what a system being revised and backwards compatible means to you... even better would be an example of a ttrpg that meets your criteria.

Cool. Thanks for explaining.... I dont agree with the reasoning but I at least understand the situation now... because i really wasn't getting it.

I'm asking for a statement where WotC mislead their consumers on the amount of support they would be offering for 2014 after '24 was released. I get if you didn't like their initial plan... and i give them props for responding to feedback, but where is the negativity around their actions coming...

Is there a record of this? Not saying I dont believe you but if it was stated many times it should be easy to finds statement and a quick Google search didn't return anything.

Did WotC ever state that '14 options would receive continuing support in DDB after the revised core was released?

So no class is using feats... then you use the rules for no feats from 2014 for all classes including 2024 classes... what's so hard about this?

The sentiment this sentence espouses right here is where it falls apart for me. It's like having backwards compatible videogames on newer systems... Yes you have to choose whether you want it upgraded to 4k at 60fps or running at 720p at 30fps. The fact it can't do all 4 at the same time doesn't...

You mean you don't care about a point you've brought up in multiple posts? Okay so now it's a bizarre subset, well then why are you bringing them up, especially since an (arguably) larger subset of the community that wanted backwards compatibility are happy with what WotC did and by your own...

Archetypes? EDIT: Also people who have actually played with both (including myself) are telling you that mixing them hasn't caused any problems.

Well what confused me is there are posters here, playing '24 who have no problem with backwards compatibility, so when you make sweeping statements about said compatibility not working and/or those who wanted it being dissapointed and I see the opposite... and have my own experience in playing...

They didn't though... especially if you use the updated monsters, they fixed it.

The funny thing is '14 was too easy for players but it's not compatible because... '24 is too easy for players. Huh?

Emphasis mine... What? The Dev team was pretty explicit about how compatibility worked in a general sense (Use things replaced in '24 vs. '14. You can play with characters from either but they need to be created with their rules, etc.) and gave enough information that anyone who thought this...