Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mmadsen" data-source="post: 4243849" data-attributes="member: 1645">I think most people would agree that&nbsp; slower, steadier advancement works better, and that low-level characters seemed almost comically inept in some ways, but I do wish the game retained a simple way to play, say, the hobbits from Fellowship and not just Legolas and Gimli.&nbsp; There's a place for true first-level characters, even if we don't want characters to default to that low power level.I didn't realize that was the rule in Boot Hill.&nbsp; Cool.I don't think D&amp;D has been a simulation of anything but itself for a while now; it's not a new complaint.&nbsp; Supposedly the new edition will be modular enough that you can tear out the parts that don't work for you, but I certainly have my doubts.I think you're way overstating your case.&nbsp; Old-school healing never made any sense.&nbsp; I think the designers made a mistake in not revising the new system far enough, because &quot;hit&quot; points clearly aren't about enduring hits.And &quot;marking&quot; may be poorly implemented, but engaging a foe makes perfect sense.Them's fightin' words, 'round these here parts.The free, automatic spells take D&amp;D even further in a direction I've never liked -- cheap, easy magic.It's not like everyone writes down all their feat descriptions in 3.5E -- or wrote down all their spell descriptions in previous editions.I'm not too concerned with keeping D&amp;D's pedigree pure, but some of the additions do seem odd.&nbsp; Dragonborn?&nbsp; In the PHB?&nbsp; Really?&nbsp; But no frost giant or iron golem in the MM?&nbsp; Just odd.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mmadsen, post: 4243849, member: 1645"] I think most people would agree that slower, steadier advancement works better, and that low-level characters seemed almost comically inept in some ways, but I do wish the game retained a simple way to play, say, the hobbits from [i]Fellowship[/i] and not just Legolas and Gimli. There's a place for true first-level characters, even if we don't want characters to default to that low power level. I didn't realize that was the rule in Boot Hill. Cool. I don't think D&D has been a simulation of anything but itself for a while now; it's not a new complaint. Supposedly the new edition will be modular enough that you can tear out the parts that don't work for you, but I certainly have my doubts. I think you're way overstating your case. Old-school healing never made any sense. I think the designers made a mistake in not revising the new system far enough, because "hit" points clearly aren't about enduring hits. And "marking" may be poorly implemented, but engaging a foe makes perfect sense. Them's fightin' words, 'round these here parts. The free, automatic spells take D&D even further in a direction I've never liked -- cheap, easy magic. It's not like everyone writes down all their feat descriptions in 3.5E -- or wrote down all their spell descriptions in previous editions. I'm not too concerned with keeping D&D's pedigree pure, but some of the additions do seem odd. Dragonborn? In the PHB? Really? But no frost giant or iron golem in the MM? Just odd. [/QUOTE]

Verification