Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 7826495" data-attributes="member: 6801845">But telling people that like the current system that their opinion isn't valuable is okay? Don't get me wrong, there is no such thing as a perfect system.  But for example I don't see how making magic unreliable would be a good thing.  Giving martial characters additional extraordinary abilities* or fate points or something else would change the nature of the game.When I point out that everyone at my table contributes in different ways and is engaged in all aspects of the game the accusations of "just fix it with RP isn't a fix" come out.  Except that is how I fix it.  Different people get the spotlight at different times because I go out of my way to try to engage different skills and backgrounds.  Considering that fighter is the most popular class according to DndBeyond, it seems like it's not a widespread issue.As other people have pointed out more elegantly than I, all games have compromises.  I think 5E made more-or-less the correct ones.  I'm not saying "tradition" is the only defense.  But I also don't believe that change for the sake of change or because some people have a problem with some aspect of the game is justification for change either.*Beyond what certain subclasses already have or that you could easily get through multi-classing or feats I guess?  </blockquote>