NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Edgar Ironpelt" data-source="post: 9453932" data-attributes="member: 32075">I'm your opposite number there. I run 3.5e when I run D&D and for me it's the sweet spot of the D&D editions, or at least can be made into one with heavy curating of the options and some judicious house rules.When 4e came out, I looked and said "Nope!" and likewise "Nope!" to PF, 5e, and 5e++ And I'm not going back to any of the earlier (A)D&D editions.As a thought, it sounds to me like some - not all, probably not most, but some - of your troubles are due to the PCs starting as starting characters, as green-as-grass newbies who are not quite competent yet.I do have some sympathy toward your players. My preferences aren't as extreme as theirs, but I did find myself nodding at certain points.I wouldn't want to have to make survival rolls to camp in the wilderness - I'd want an auto-success, unless something has gone very wrong, or unless my character is completely untrained and inexperienced at camping, in which case having to camp at all "in the heat of an adventure" means that something has gone very wrong.And I definitely would want a full recharge each day and full HP back after each encounter. Any exceptions would either be RARE occasions where something has gone Horribly Wrong, or else the sort of Hard Fun that I find no fun at all.On the other hand, I do want a mix of roleplaying, exploration, combat, and other activities, even if I also want that mix to be generous with the combat. So I wouldn't want a game that drops the roleplaying and exploration in favor of a more nearly pure combat game.</blockquote>

Verification