Search results

So put the array as the standard option #1 and list everything else as options.

Allow rolling stats, yes. Encourage it, no. As long as it isn't the core/standard generation method, isn't the first listed, and isn't presented as "normally, you generate those numbers(stats) by rolling dice" I have no problem.

Responding to a few bits: 1. Rolling stats--I'm vehemently opposed to rolling stats being the standard option or the one listed first. It's had enough history that it should be in the game, but not the norm. 2. Clerics--healing/buffing historically has limited appeal. 4E, by making healing and...

What I can compare is the direction they are taking the game in, and whether the playtest as it stands now is something that could possibly evolve into something I'd play.

Backgrounds 1. I'm ok with the listed Backgrounds. More would be nice, but no objections. 2. Noticable lack of physical skills combined with too many lores. Bestiary 1. Boring sacks of HP 2. Encounter Building/XP: more on this later4 Character Creation 1. "Normally, you generate those...

Don't forget sex appeal. Appealing to new players also requires that the game inspires or grabs them in some way. Something that causes them to say "that's awesome!" The current rules don't really accomplish that IMO.

I ran two sessions with the first playtest, and played one. Most of my consternation right now is seeing everything that bothered me the first time fully intact. Boring, spammy mundanity.

Kinda, but I would also want Fighters, Rogues, and Clerics to have the option not to be boring and mundane(the 5E Wizard is fine in this regard atm)

Maybe if they made it less painfully boring I might play this 5E as a diversion from D&D, but I don't see where I'd ever play it as D&D.

Making characters less mundane.

I'm finding it more boring than 2E. It has more character options, but 2E's more variable math, more powerful magic, and weird subsystems gave it more color. I'm not interested in a retroclone, and 5E does not compare to modern D&D(3E and 4E) at all. I'm even finding it failing as a retroclone...

Doesn't look like any sort of D&D I would ever play. Basic=boring.

If you want to play 5E as more than a retroclone, where is that going to come from?

This playtest is too busy being a boring retroclone that I can't hate it for not being 4E. I've been pre-empted.

I'm finding it dull. Painfully dull in fact.

All this looks painfully boring compared to late-era 3.5, Pathfinder, 4E, and SWSE. I was bored to tears running and playing the first round, and after reading the new playtest front to back and see nothing that would change that. Also, the Kobold Dragonshield is a far superior Defender than...

Hogwash, you've specifically said that the inclusion of things I and other people want would ruin 5E for you. Let's ask a direct question, assuming you had modular options to avoid using them, what would your opinion of a 5E that included the following be: 1. Plot coupons 2. A Warlord class...

Hogwash, you've specifically said that the inclusion of things I and other people want would ruin 5E for you. Let's ask a direct question, assuming you had modular options to avoid using them, what would your opinion of a 5E that included the following be: 1. Plot coupons 2. A Warlord class...

The edition wars have shown that people can be quite intolerant of people who play D&D differently. As a result, that people play differently needs to be stated again and again. No, the objection is against people who state or imply that particular style(or any other style for that matter)...

Independent from author/actor/ect stance is effect vs process based resolution. Effect based resolution cares about what happens, but not necessarily how while process based resolution wants to model each step in the game world.