Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="SlyDoubt" data-source="post: 5795193" data-attributes="member: 6667337">Yeah I definitely agree about the XP comment. Having a flat xp amount is both simpler and to me makes a bit more sense though my only experience is 3.X/PF and 4E.I also believe magic items belong in the DMG. Or at least NOT in the phb. I think it makes magic items a bit too assumed and a bit too mundane for my taste. That's not a huge issue but I just don't see a strong reason for them to be in the PHB if you're also going to make a DMG that is necessary for DMs anyway.The economy of actions idea is interesting. I think 4E was on the right track. I remember seeing previews and thinking &quot;this is genius!&quot;. Until I saw how many powers there were and how consistent and similar they were. I think the concept is a good one I just don't like how drastically it modified spells and less magical actions. Rituals vs powers was just not a good idea in my opinion. That divide really felt wrong to me.I like these things too and I hope some of the concepts explored in 4E make it into 5E. I think they will. Because they were genuinely good ideas and facilitated fun and interesting sessions. Some kind of hybrid of 4E and PF would be incredible I think. The width and breadth of the 3.X system with the brevity and balance of 4E. I can only hope! I'm sure I like qualities of AD&amp;D and 2E but I don't have the personal experience to say so. Other than that I hope for extensive setting support by wotc. 4E was terrible as far as this is concerned and it really turned me off.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="SlyDoubt, post: 5795193, member: 6667337"] Yeah I definitely agree about the XP comment. Having a flat xp amount is both simpler and to me makes a bit more sense though my only experience is 3.X/PF and 4E. I also believe magic items belong in the DMG. Or at least NOT in the phb. I think it makes magic items a bit too assumed and a bit too mundane for my taste. That's not a huge issue but I just don't see a strong reason for them to be in the PHB if you're also going to make a DMG that is necessary for DMs anyway. The economy of actions idea is interesting. I think 4E was on the right track. I remember seeing previews and thinking "this is genius!". Until I saw how many powers there were and how consistent and similar they were. I think the concept is a good one I just don't like how drastically it modified spells and less magical actions. Rituals vs powers was just not a good idea in my opinion. That divide really felt wrong to me. I like these things too and I hope some of the concepts explored in 4E make it into 5E. I think they will. Because they were genuinely good ideas and facilitated fun and interesting sessions. Some kind of hybrid of 4E and PF would be incredible I think. The width and breadth of the 3.X system with the brevity and balance of 4E. I can only hope! I'm sure I like qualities of AD&D and 2E but I don't have the personal experience to say so. Other than that I hope for extensive setting support by wotc. 4E was terrible as far as this is concerned and it really turned me off. [/QUOTE]

Verification