Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Malmuria" data-source="post: 8373436" data-attributes="member: 7030755">This is interesting.&nbsp; What are we paying for in an rpg?&nbsp; Personally, I value simplicity and succinct expression.&nbsp; I want to be able to print a page with a character sheet on one side, and all the rules one of my players need to know on the other side, and hand it to them.&nbsp; So my preferred 6e would give a choice of a few relatively powerful and highly thematic abilities for race, and put everything else into class.&nbsp; fwiw, I think Basic dnd is perfect for classic fantasy as it is both simple and leans into archetype.&nbsp; One of the things that is confusing to me is that, if you want a game that emphasizes archetype, I can't imagine 5e as currently written working for you.For me, this would be perfect.&nbsp; Probably the only thing that would be better would be getting rid of chargen ASI all together and just increasing the standard array and point buy (rolling can stay as is).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Malmuria, post: 8373436, member: 7030755"] This is interesting. What are we paying for in an rpg? Personally, I value simplicity and succinct expression. I want to be able to print a page with a character sheet on one side, and all the rules one of my players need to know on the other side, and hand it to them. So my preferred 6e would give a choice of a few relatively powerful and highly thematic abilities for race, and put everything else into class. fwiw, I think Basic dnd is perfect for classic fantasy as it is both simple and leans into archetype. One of the things that is confusing to me is that, if you want a game that emphasizes archetype, I can't imagine 5e as currently written working for you. For me, this would be perfect. Probably the only thing that would be better would be getting rid of chargen ASI all together and just increasing the standard array and point buy (rolling can stay as is). [/QUOTE]

Verification