Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ycore Rixle" data-source="post: 990167" data-attributes="member: 675">I strongly agree with rounser that the class archetypes are essential to the game.  Great points in his post.My biggest request for 4e would be that they replace the AoO mechanic.  I have no idea what they could switch it to that would still address the needs that AoO's address, but AoO's struck me as clunky three years ago - and they still do.Henry, I agree that there are some similarities in the version switches 1e-2e and 3e-3.5e.  I'm much happier with 3-3.5, though, because it didn't eliminate major things like assassins and half-orcs, and it didn't do the "Ultimate TSR Weasel Maneuver" (I think they copyrighted that phrase <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> ) of renaming demons and devils as a sop to people who didn't buy D&D products anyway.  It seemed to me that TSR was trying to change the game we play from 1e to 2e.  WoTC was expressly not trying to do that in 3e to 3.5e - they were "trying to make the game rules reflect more closely the way the game is played."  Whether or not they succeeded, of course, is a matter for debate.  But I do believe that their hearts were in the right place, and I don't believe that about the 1e-2e change.</blockquote>