Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 7455712" data-attributes="member: 6698278">Realize though that 1e, 2e, and 3e I played exactly this way that I want at the time.&nbsp; I didn't have to house rule anything in any major way.&nbsp; I tended to ban some classes and races but more often for the flavor of my campaign than for this reason.&nbsp; I guess I could just go back and play one of those editions or a retroclone of some sort.&nbsp; I'm sure Castles and Crusades would work.&nbsp; I would just like some modern elements of game design while still keeping the essential playstyle.&nbsp; I'm a Gygaxian playstyle guy at heart.Also, don't interpret every change of mind as &quot;progress&quot;.&nbsp; For you looking back it was progress.&nbsp; That is great.&nbsp; I think I feel a bit stronger than you do about certain things.&nbsp; About others I am more tolerant.&nbsp; But if I was told I had one game to play and it was 5e (or 4e for that matter) as written or quit roleplaying all together, I think I'd quit.&nbsp; I have a lot of entertainment options.&nbsp; Now of course no one is giving me that dire choice.&nbsp; In the end, as Gygax said, the big secret is you can write your own game.&nbsp; So that will be where it ultimately ends if I don't find something sooner.&nbsp; I'm not as sure about Pathfinder 2e as you are.&nbsp; Even PF1 is a game I could play by cutting away all the objectionable elements.&nbsp; For one just start with the core book only.&nbsp; Ban a few classes that maybe did some weird things.&nbsp; As long as I have a game with Fighter, Rogue/Thief, Cleric, Wizard (vancian I hope) then I can play.&nbsp; In PF2, I believe the structure is good but the elements may be in some cases objectionable.&nbsp; Such a system is easier to house rule than one where the structure is not good (for me).&nbsp; It's kind of why I was so disappointed in 5e not providing a subset of the game that is usable by people like myself.&nbsp; Again it's a hit so not questioning their business decisions.&nbsp; It seems it would have been easy to do it without losing what they have though.&nbsp; By putting Second Wind and Action Surge at the class level instead of inside one of the paths, they made the entire class unusable by me.&nbsp; The Champion was my big hope and it came close.&nbsp; I have to think they were trying but just didn't fully grasp the issues shared by people like myself.&nbsp; I hope it's not because they don't care.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Emerikol, post: 7455712, member: 6698278"] Realize though that 1e, 2e, and 3e I played exactly this way that I want [B]at the time[/B]. I didn't have to house rule anything in any major way. I tended to ban some classes and races but more often for the flavor of my campaign than for this reason. I guess I could just go back and play one of those editions or a retroclone of some sort. I'm sure Castles and Crusades would work. I would just like some modern elements of game design while still keeping the essential playstyle. I'm a Gygaxian playstyle guy at heart. Also, don't interpret every change of mind as "progress". For you looking back it was progress. That is great. I think I feel a bit stronger than you do about certain things. About others I am more tolerant. But if I was told I had one game to play and it was 5e (or 4e for that matter) as written or quit roleplaying all together, I think I'd quit. I have a lot of entertainment options. Now of course no one is giving me that dire choice. In the end, as Gygax said, the big secret is you can write your own game. So that will be where it ultimately ends if I don't find something sooner. I'm not as sure about Pathfinder 2e as you are. Even PF1 is a game I could play by cutting away all the objectionable elements. For one just start with the core book only. Ban a few classes that maybe did some weird things. As long as I have a game with Fighter, Rogue/Thief, Cleric, Wizard (vancian I hope) then I can play. In PF2, I believe the structure is good but the elements may be in some cases objectionable. Such a system is easier to house rule than one where the structure is not good (for me). It's kind of why I was so disappointed in 5e not providing a subset of the game that is usable by people like myself. Again it's a hit so not questioning their business decisions. It seems it would have been easy to do it without losing what they have though. By putting Second Wind and Action Surge at the class level instead of inside one of the paths, they made the entire class unusable by me. The Champion was my big hope and it came close. I have to think they were trying but just didn't fully grasp the issues shared by people like myself. I hope it's not because they don't care. [/QUOTE]

Verification