Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mouseferatu" data-source="post: 1119094" data-attributes="member: 1288">Hmm... I've read through the various posts there...So we're looking at going back to restricted multiclassing, back to a game with no skills or feats to differentiate Bob Fighter from Joe Fighter, and back to a game where only a thief can learn to pick a lock no matter how much the wizard may practice at it?No thanks. Count me out. I'm all for simplicity. And I truly believe a simpler version of D&D should exist for beginners or those who are intimidated by the size/number-heaviness of the core rules. (In fact, I've done work on such in my spare time.) In essence, a Basic 3.5.But 3.5-compatible 1E AD&D? No thank you. The concept sounds (to me) like the worst of both worlds--it lacks the options of 3.5, and it lacks the simplicity of Basic.Now, don't anybody yell at me for jumping to conclusions. I intend to follow this, and if it starts looking different, or I discover I misinterpreted, I'll happily admit to being wrong. But from what I've seen so far, I can't say the idea appeals. I like being able to customize my characters.</blockquote>