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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 6363224" data-attributes="member: 58416">The combinations that some people had with multiclassing, bonus actions, and extra attacks had gotten pretty out of hand toward the end of the playtest.  It also started to feel as though system mastery was going to be a big part of 5th Edition and how it was meant to be played.  The broken characters were made even more noticeable by the monsters being rather pitiful during some versions of the packet.  In some of the worst cases, it felt as though 5th Edition characters would be as broken as some of the worst 3rd Edition offenders while fighting monsters which were even weaker than some of the early 4th Edition creatures.  It was so lopsided that it was no longer fun.  I also started to feel like I need to sit and do math homework if I wanted to build a character which kept pace with the rest of the table.I'm not opposed to optimizing.  Different people enjoy different aspects of the game.  I myself do put some amount of thought toward being effective.  However, when I sit down to play a rpg, I want something different out of the experience than what I get from a board game.  I likewise want more than a tactical skirmish game in which building a character feels a lot like trying to optimize a magic deck.  The playtest left me with some rather bad impressions of the game.I also wasn't very impressed with Murder At Balder's Gate.  Initially, the idea of a murder mystery sounded cool.  In actual play; especially with the Encounters format, I don't feel it worked very well.  It felt as though the rp choices I made had little to no effect on the outcome of the adventure.  This further amplified the bad feelings I had about the broken aspects of the game because it seemed that I was constantly being pushed into one way of solving problems: hacking through them.  While I understand that combat encounters are a large part of D&D (and I'm fine with that,) the whole experience just sort of fell flat and felt one-dimensional for me.  I had hoped for more from it.  I wanted to see a different style of adventure succeed in hopes of it prompting more variety from official modules.  I mentioned other players.  It was my experience that the broken nature of the rules fostered a certain playstyle and attracted a certain style of player.  I'd never claim that the way someone else plays the game is 'badwrongfun,' but I will claim that my experiences were made worse by being surrounded by certain behaviors.  I also noticed that quite a few younger, newer, and less experienced players were somewhat intimidated by it.  All things considered, it did not present the game in a very good light.Edit: The finished version of the rules appears to have fixed some of the most blatant abuses.The Player's Handbook is also portrayed in a way that suggests that the other pillars of play will actually be supported.Whether that will actually be the case, I honestly cannot say.  I haven't yet had a chance to try the rules now that I have the finished version of the PHB.  I'm also still somewhat in the dark concerning what things look like from a DM's perspective when it comes to 5th Edition.  Though, so far -at least within the confines of the PHB- I like what is presented.</blockquote>

Verification