Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 5026734" data-attributes="member: 5100">Way less complex than 3e.  3e ended up being more complex than Hero, but without the flexibility for the price.  D&D stayed on top not because it was first, but because it was the most accessible system.  That's its niche and it should stay there.  That doesn't mean it needs to be the simplest, just that it should be easy to grok and play.Personally, I think one of the other positive things about 1e was the subsystem "problem".  I'm not suggesting that we go back to percentile dice for grappling, but I do think some variation would be grand.  For me, I'd use subsystems to differentiate the power sources.  That would keep the complexity down for an individual player, especially those (like half my group) who just want to show up and kill orcs.  But, it would offer the "system mastery" carrot for those (like the other half of my group) who grove on finding hidden gems in the game and occasionally impress others at the table with their arcane rules knowledge.  The whole "everyone rolls d20; adds stat, level, and item bonus; then compares against a defense" adds a sense of sameness.If there's anything I miss from 1e, it's being able to get the newbie up and running with 10 minutes explanation, 10 minutes of character generation, and a fighter PC; while the grognard played the wizard with lots of resource management.  I appreciate that it isn't "fun" for the wizard to be reserved for advanced players, but there has to be a way to recapture that tiered complexity.I think I started by saying one thing and finished by saying another, but I happy with my rambling.</blockquote>

Verification