Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7166550" data-attributes="member: 82106">The idea that Hasbro would create a product 'designed to fail' is of course beyond ridiculous. It might not be too much to say that the person(s) you are referring to, or that [MENTION=15684]Imruphel[/MENTION] is referring to, couldn't succeed, but maybe nobody could have pulled off what they tried. I think it was an ill-advised attempt to make up for earlier mistakes which couldn't be fixed. Otherwise I agree, the whole charade of 5e development repulsed me. I won't have anything to do with it, although I did play in one game. My opinion of the rules is similar to yours. Its a VERY much cleaned up 2e that avoids most of the really large pitfalls of 3e. I found the play experience to be snorefull really, just very much like playing 2e all over again, a game I outgrew 20 years ago... And Essentials could well be knocked for moving in the same direction, though it still has enough of 4e in it that you can play it like 4e core and get pretty much the 4e experience (you have to ignore a few abominations in the RC and of course bring rituals back from core, but that's not a big deal). The main issue I have with Essentials is the variation on resource recovery that is imposed along with the break from core-style A/E/D/U. Still, what you really need there is to simply make HS fungible. The Slayer spends his getting hacked up in the front lines, the wizard spends his putting out daily level harm to the bad guys. It works, and HoML definitely shows that, if nothing else.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 7166550, member: 82106"] The idea that Hasbro would create a product 'designed to fail' is of course beyond ridiculous. It might not be too much to say that the person(s) you are referring to, or that [MENTION=15684]Imruphel[/MENTION] is referring to, couldn't succeed, but maybe nobody could have pulled off what they tried. I think it was an ill-advised attempt to make up for earlier mistakes which couldn't be fixed. Otherwise I agree, the whole charade of 5e development repulsed me. I won't have anything to do with it, although I did play in one game. My opinion of the rules is similar to yours. Its a VERY much cleaned up 2e that avoids most of the really large pitfalls of 3e. I found the play experience to be snorefull really, just very much like playing 2e all over again, a game I outgrew 20 years ago... And Essentials could well be knocked for moving in the same direction, though it still has enough of 4e in it that you can play it like 4e core and get pretty much the 4e experience (you have to ignore a few abominations in the RC and of course bring rituals back from core, but that's not a big deal). The main issue I have with Essentials is the variation on resource recovery that is imposed along with the break from core-style A/E/D/U. Still, what you really need there is to simply make HS fungible. The Slayer spends his getting hacked up in the front lines, the wizard spends his putting out daily level harm to the bad guys. It works, and HoML definitely shows that, if nothing else. [/QUOTE]

Verification