Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8379459" data-attributes="member: 7032025">It's a generalistic system that is designed mostly around human-like adventurers. Previous editions and in particular 3e/PF  have given a false sense of what the game could be by trying to combine a roleplaying game with a combat game, trying for "complete rules" that could resolve every situation including the stats of a single spider vs. those of a gargantuan dragon. It did not work because it became quickly so complex that it was abusable and ultimately unplayable. 4e then tried for an almost pure combat game with formalised rules and restrictions, so much that the game lost its openness. In addition to slaughtering too many sacred cows, that killed the game as well.This is summarised very nicely in the SAC: "The DM is key. Many unexpected things can happen in a D&D campaign, and no set of rules could reasonably account for every contingency. If the rules tried to do so, the game would become unplayable. An alternative would be for the rules to severely limit what characters can do, which would be counter to the open-endedness of D&D. The direction we chose for the current edition was to lay a foundation of rules that a DM could build on, and we embraced the DM’s role as the bridge between the things the rules address and the things they don’t."So in 5e, they went back to the previous formula of something that can cater for many tastes as much as a compromise can, and it was a small miracle, it worked and took the world by surprise with millions of gamers finding D&D cool again.There will always be extremists of all sides that are going to want the game to be modified to be perfect for their taste, too bad for the lazy ones who cannot do it on their own (or with the support of a huge community almost always ready to help) and who think that they have the slightest influence on the direction that the game is taking. The devs are rightly confirmed in the choices that they made in the past because the game started really strongly and is still going extremely well. And I am pretty sure that, with the amount of effort and playtesting that was necessary to make 5e and which would, in the end, very probably end up with the same kind of compromise, combined with the fact that as soon as a new edition would be announced, the sales of 5e would come crashing down, no new edition or major change is coming soon.Personally, I don't like powergaming, I think it's a dangerous trend to make PCs compete for technical power in what is the worlds' most cooperative game ever, where friends can get together to tell incredible stories and adventure as a party in fantastic places that exist nowhere else than their combined imagination. It's therefore a source of conflict, jealousy and bitterness if the players are not experienced in dealing with it. But I don't begrudge powergamers their builds and optimisation, if it makes them happy, why not let them have their fun ? After more than 7 years, it's been shown that they have exactly zero influence on the game, almost none of the rules clarifications that they are looking for has seen the light of day and there has been very little power drift.All the changes are totally optional, the PH has not been revised to show anything but the legacy races with their ASI intact, and every DM is free to do whatever he wants with an open game. After that, it's better not to discuss or negotiate with extremists (of all sides, by the way, and not targeting anyone in this thread or elsewhere), they don't represent much outside of themselves and in the end you won't be able to convince them of anything.No, the rules are not perfect, but with a bit of work every DM can make the game almost perfect for their table, whether you allow the new ASIs or not (None of the DMs at our tables do, but every DM is free to choose, so what more do you want, exactly ?).</blockquote>

Verification