Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DMZ2112" data-source="post: 6166242" data-attributes="member: 78752">No, no, it's &quot;D&amp;D Next: <a href="http://wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20130624" target="_blank">Harming One Style of Play at the Expense of Another</a>.&quot;&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; Fifth paragraph.Speaking of which, regrettably, I really wish I could get excited about this new packet.&nbsp; The treatment of skills and feats is pretty much exactly counter to the direction I was hoping this game would go.&nbsp; Both are now hyper-streamlined, and while I see some potential in the idea of &quot;feat as specialty&quot; rather than &quot;specialty as feats,&quot; I feel like fewer, broader skills and feats ultimately defeats the purpose of having them in the first place.&nbsp; The objective, in character design, is to create a unique entity, or as close as one can realistically achieve, and these design decisions strip away an important tool in that arsenal.&nbsp; This strategy feels like it won't please the players who hate feats OR the players who love them.Adventuring gear proficiencies are cute and thematic, and I'm sure they will enable some elegant feat design down the road, but for now it just feels like unnecessary complexity (rogues don't have a lockpicking abiliity; they have proficiency with thieves' tools, which allows them to use a Dex check to pick locks).&nbsp; It took scanning three packet documents for me to figure out how lockpicking worked, and I got my answer in the Equipment guide.&nbsp; That seems... counterintuitive.All in all, I'm glad I didn't make arrangements to preorder Dragonspear Castle; this new version of the game holds very little interest for me. </blockquote>

[QUOTE="DMZ2112, post: 6166242, member: 78752"] No, no, it's [COLOR=#333333]"D&D Next: [URL="http://wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20130624"]Harming One Style of Play at the Expense of Another[/URL]." :) Fifth paragraph. Speaking of which, regrettably, I really wish I could get excited about this new packet. The treatment of skills and feats is pretty much exactly counter to the direction I was hoping this game would go. Both are now hyper-streamlined, and while I see some potential in the idea of "feat as specialty" rather than "specialty as feats," I feel like fewer, broader skills and feats ultimately defeats the purpose of having them in the first place. The objective, in character design, is to create a unique entity, or as close as one can realistically achieve, and these design decisions strip away an important tool in that arsenal. This strategy feels like it won't please the players who hate feats OR the players who love them. Adventuring gear proficiencies are cute and thematic, and I'm sure they will enable some elegant feat design down the road, but for now it just feels like unnecessary complexity (rogues don't have a lockpicking abiliity; they have proficiency with thieves' tools, which allows them to use a Dex check to pick locks). It took scanning three packet documents for me to figure out how lockpicking worked, and I got my answer in the Equipment guide. That seems... counterintuitive. All in all, I'm glad I didn't make arrangements to preorder Dragonspear Castle; this new version of the game holds very little interest for me. [/COLOR] [/QUOTE]

Verification