Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 6580801">I don't know that I would call 5E an OSR style game. That seems like a stretch to me. But I think that is a whole other discussion. I appreciate this response and the clarification. Again though, I think thinking of it in terms of movement forward or backwards, isn't terribly helpful. The issue for me when 4E came out wasn't that they moved the game forward, it was the way in which it moved forward. This is a very important distinction. I had wanted the game to progress and grow, to eliminate stuff that didn't work and innovate in key areas. And I wasn't out to play the game I remembered playing back in the late 80s or early 90s either. What I wanted was the stuff I liked about D&D, the things that brought me to the table to play the game. I did want it to have a certain identifiable "D&Dness". What that is will vary from person to person of course. In the end the way the class powers ended up working just didn't capture it for me. With any edition of D&D I do want it to move forward, address issues of previous editions and also feel like current (like it is fresh and new, drawing on ideas that people are actively talking about and interested in). I was on board for every change from 1E to 3E to 3.5. It was only when we came to 4E that I had an issue.</blockquote>