Search results

I have a problem with it for the core. I also don't see why it's necessary. There are better ways to make fighters more capable and interesting then to engage in radical narrativism. I was rather pleased to see that 5e removed most of it. I certainly wouldn't have purchased the core...

I didn't not present any solutions as you suggested.

It really depends on how the rule is presented. At one point the play test you had to pick the healing and resting rules you wanted to use. There was no default set of rules. IMO, that would have been the ideal situation had that continued.

I hope there is a wild talent system for those campaigns who like to use them.

sounds like you'd also be happy with a magical warlord.

I've looked for 5e games that are using the optional rules in the DMG, but I haven't found them. Now, had 5e included old school healing and resting rules as an option in the PHB I certainly wouldn't have a problem finding a game. At the moment, I'm stuck DMing 5e and playing 2e.

I think you have me mixed up with someone else.

The issue can be corrected with house rules, but good luck trying to find a game as a player with a group who will use them. For this reason I was really looking forward to official options in the PHB.

I've read them. Those rules don't accomplish that without modifications. They do not remove Hit Dice either.

IMO, WotC did a terrible job of providing official options everyone needed. For example, I hate the healing/resting rules. Even the optional rules in the DMG don't give me what I'm looking for. With that said, I certainly don't consider the game to be a closed book. Of course, I'm willing...

those are your words not mine. Not everyone got what they wanted with 5e. You just need to accept that. btw, I think you need ask WotC for much more than simply a new 4e styled fighter, you'll need a new splat book that enables that entire playstyle.

My hope for the fighter was that it would be very simple and not have a "role" badge attached to it. I'm really not understanding some of these complaints. WotC listened to the feedback they received.

If I had to pick one thing from older editions that I'd like to see return to D&D, it's old healing rates coupled with the complete removal of non-magical healing.

I certainly don't want to see more classes. More sub classes are fine however. I'd also restrict new a sub classes to iconic concepts and not things that have strange and meaningless names.

I agree, I should not have to read a bunch of forum posts and tweet Ed Greenwood to discover that the realms have returned to their AD&D incarnation. I want to know what gods are alive and which ones are dead. I want a new map of the entire realms that inspires us to dream (not some small area...

I wouldn't feel comfortable running a FR module without a campaign source book or a reference package. I certainly won't by an AP for a non-existent campaign setting.

If you like options, buildz, optimization, etc I'm not sure you're going to like 5e. I personally don't desire such things, but it's important to note that 5e characters are not built using feat trees and the system isn't bloated with modifiers. It really does play more like pre-3e systems...

I've read many D&D fantasy books in which a particular character suffers a real physical wound from a weapon and is subsequently healed by magic. For example, I'm reminded of all the times Goldmoon healed the companions physical wounds with magic. Personally, I think a wand of CLW is a...

I agree, you would have to change the rate of healing for overland travel for random encounters to have any lingering consequences.

Wow I thought the one-true-way ism died with the last edition. Of course, it's all about how you desire to play. My style of play doesn't at all conform to your definition of hit points. You can say I've been playing wrong all you want, but I've been playing that way since AD&D and I've...