Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Felon" data-source="post: 1310987" data-attributes="member: 8158">All ancient history from a time when &quot;balance&quot; was a concept very few people--especially those working at TSR--had any real grasp on, and there was nobody with a clear vision of what the priorities in D&amp;D should be (other than a way to make money off of dumb ol' gamers who will buy anything dangled before them). I've been around a while myself and I can safely say that 2e was certainly NOT about providing a variety of viable options for player characters. &nbsp;This is the logical fallacy known as &quot;arguing to tradition&quot; (i.e. &quot;this is the way they've always done it, so that's how it's supposed to be&quot;). It's not valid because what they did in previous editions they should correct in current editions if it's not well-designed, which it isn't if there are only a couple of viable armor options for the vast majority of characters. &lt;deepsigh&gt; Again, this is just another take on the poverty arguement, which was already accounted in the first line of the first post of this thread. That's seven &lt;/deepsigh&gt;Well, most rogues can certainly do better with masterwork studded leather or chain shirt if that's what you mean.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Felon, post: 1310987, member: 8158"] All ancient history from a time when "balance" was a concept very few people--especially those working at TSR--had any real grasp on, and there was nobody with a clear vision of what the priorities in D&D should be (other than a way to make money off of dumb ol' gamers who will buy anything dangled before them). I've been around a while myself and I can safely say that 2e was certainly NOT about providing a variety of viable options for player characters. This is the logical fallacy known as "arguing to tradition" (i.e. "this is the way they've always done it, so that's how it's supposed to be"). It's not valid because what they did in previous editions they should correct in current editions if it's not well-designed, which it isn't if there are only a couple of viable armor options for the vast majority of characters. <deepsigh> Again, this is just another take on the poverty arguement, which was already accounted in the first line of the first post of this thread. That's seven </deepsigh> Well, most rogues can certainly do better with masterwork studded leather or chain shirt if that's what you mean. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification