Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AkaKageWarrior" data-source="post: 7557406" data-attributes="member: 67010">You're mentioning the 1e barbarian (wasn't that UA stuff?), and you call 5e archetypes overpowered?Sorry, but that is ridiculous! Most 1e-UA stuff was not allowed at our table, mostly because basically all UA stuff was really OP.I haven't found an overpowered archetype until now. I'm actually always amazed how equal in power the classes and archetypes are designed. Almost too levelled!Why multi-classing (remember the ultra-crappy 1e multi/dual-classing rules?)? I like MC since 3e, but it's good to simply stay fighter, but cast some spells later on. Or a cleric who can sneak and pick a lock.Haha! So what again could the fighter do in 1e? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> The martial classes had weapon and armor selection (maybe 2-weapon-fighting), the casters had their spell selection.Okay, I have a baaaad long-time memory, but no matter how hard I try, I can't remember too many options.Sure, I really had fun playing 1e AD&amp;D, and I never complained about options. But that was because I didn't know there could be any. But the options became more with (almost) each edition, and I loved them all (except 4e, that's when we switched to Pathfinder...), mainly because of OPTIONS!Never complained... yeah, as a kid I never complained about our typical daily german lunch (meat, vegetables, potatoes) that my mum cooked, but heck I was a happy boy when I discovered italian, indian, asian, ... food later on in my life.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AkaKageWarrior, post: 7557406, member: 67010"] You're mentioning the 1e barbarian (wasn't that UA stuff?), and you call 5e archetypes overpowered? Sorry, but that is ridiculous! Most 1e-UA stuff was not allowed at our table, mostly because basically all UA stuff was really OP. I haven't found an overpowered archetype until now. I'm actually always amazed how equal in power the classes and archetypes are designed. Almost too levelled! Why multi-classing (remember the ultra-crappy 1e multi/dual-classing rules?)? I like MC since 3e, but it's good to simply stay fighter, but cast some spells later on. Or a cleric who can sneak and pick a lock. Haha! So what again could the fighter do in 1e? ;) The martial classes had weapon and armor selection (maybe 2-weapon-fighting), the casters had their spell selection. Okay, I have a baaaad long-time memory, but no matter how hard I try, I can't remember too many options. Sure, I really had fun playing 1e AD&D, and I never complained about options. But that was because I didn't know there could be any. But the options became more with (almost) each edition, and I loved them all (except 4e, that's when we switched to Pathfinder...), mainly because of OPTIONS! Never complained... yeah, as a kid I never complained about our typical daily german lunch (meat, vegetables, potatoes) that my mum cooked, but heck I was a happy boy when I discovered italian, indian, asian, ... food later on in my life. [/QUOTE]

Verification