Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="n00bdragon" data-source="post: 5876260" data-attributes="member: 6689371">Good math is essential to a good game. You might have fun with a poorly designed game despite it's flaws but very few people enjoy games because of the game's problems.That said, I have total faith that the design team can put forth a good faith effort to make the math of the game as tight as possible. Even back as far as AD&D there were serious efforts to make the crunch of the game work solidly and for the most part it has succeeded in every edition. Things always fall apart at high levels and I have no reason to believe they won't botch that again because it will get scant playtesting but hey, that's practically a D&D tradition by now.What DOES alarm me because I know they have the power to fix it but I believe they simply don't want to is the balance of narrative power between magical classes and non-magical ones. Clearly, there are players who enjoy games where people with magic can do whatever they want while others can do only whatever the DM allows them to. I disagree with these players and their philosophy on game design and narrative control. Furthermore, I believe that the developers not only believe that model to be the best default model, but I believe they will actively avoid ways of easily implementing alternative models (either where non-magical types gain the same immense narrative powers or casters are reduced to the narrative weakness of non-casters). From what I've heard so far the core classes will be so focused on servicing that nebulous "iconic D&D feel" that the only remedy will be the 3e-esque solution to "ban core" and start over with new classes.In a nutshell, the work they have done so far looks less modular and more like a plate of spaghetti (inextricably tangled).</blockquote>

Verification