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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 6348020" data-attributes="member: 5143">So, all you are saying is "I liked the changes Paizo made.  I don't like the changes WOTC made."Originally you said that WOTC just made a homebrew of an existing system which is why no one was excited about it.  You just said Paizo made a homebrew of an existing system and that's why they succeeded.I don't think it's about whether something is a "homebrew of an existing system" or not.  WOTC just made some changes to the game that some people don't like.This isn't true at all.  They made the changes they did at the encouragement of a large group of their players.  A group I was part of which mostly consisted of Living Greyhawk players, convention players, and people who liked standardization and were tired of the lack of balance in 3.5eYou miss the part where a large number of fans DID like 4e and it sold pretty well.  I understand that you like Paizo and Pathfinder.  However, saying that WOTC made a huge mistake by changing the game at all simply isn't true.  Things need to change from time to time.  It's always best to strive to make things better.  Even if you fail now and then.Edition warring aside, different people like different things.  Whether D&D needed to change or not is heavily based on opinion.However, 5e is not a rebadged 3.5 system by any means.  It shares almost an equal number of things in common with 2e as it does with 3.5e.  If anything, this is a game that went back to 2e and iterated from there while using some good ideas from 3.5e(feats, multiclassing, and attack bonuses going up) and some good ideas from 4e("Healing Surges", Encounter powers, balanced monster math), with a bunch of its own innovations.This isn't a system designed to bring back people who liked 3.5e.  It's a system for people who felt D&D kind of got off track in both 3.5e AND 4e.</blockquote>

Verification