Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wulf Ratbane" data-source="post: 4095922" data-attributes="member: 94">It depends.The natural end result of d20 is/was True20. It doesn't get much simpler than 3 classes: Expert, Warrior, Adept, etc.You could further standardize the game so that you only ever use a d20-- eliminate all other dice.And etc.But in the larger sense, I agree that some amount of design Darwinism is a good thing. There are certainly some 4e simplifications that I agree with. In fact I don't particularly have an issue with these changes to armor.But to suggest that the game could/should be reduced to mithril chain shirt and mithril plate-- because that's all players ever seemed to wear, given 3e's investiture of power in the players' hands-- is a bit silly.I could go on to predict that 4e will go through exactly the same stages of player-driven Darwinism. In the context of this thread, for example, why have copper or silver pieces at all? PCs don't use them past 1st level-- if at all.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wulf Ratbane, post: 4095922, member: 94"] It depends. The natural end result of d20 is/was True20. It doesn't get much simpler than 3 classes: Expert, Warrior, Adept, etc. You could further standardize the game so that you only ever use a d20-- eliminate all other dice. And etc. But in the larger sense, I agree that [i]some[/i] amount of design Darwinism is a good thing. There are certainly some 4e simplifications that I agree with. In fact I don't particularly have an issue with these changes to armor. But to suggest that the game could/should be reduced to mithril chain shirt and mithril plate-- because that's all players ever seemed to wear, given 3e's investiture of power in the players' hands-- is a bit silly. I could go on to predict that 4e will go through exactly the same stages of player-driven Darwinism. In the context of this thread, for example, why have copper or silver pieces at all? PCs don't use them past 1st level-- [i][b]if at all.[/b][/i][b][/b] [/QUOTE]

Verification