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="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6359322" data-attributes="member: 996">Though you get around to refuting the above, yourself, later, I'll still waste a moment saying that it's not the game that opens itself up to the accusation, it's just something an accuser with no valid criticisms can always resort to.     It's the initial release. It's got less stuff, sure, so maybe it appears streamlined compared to 3.5/Pathfinder with 14 years of bloat.  But, if you look at the actual core of the system, it's just about the same level of complexity as any modern ed (fairly complex, but not as bad as the arbitrary sub-systems of the early days), just shuffled around a bit.    Just by addressing 3e issues (that had already been solved), that's a step back, by definition.    Maybe if they'd stuck to bounded accuracy and not had proficiency in saves, that'd make sense.  But a WIS save is distinct from a WIS check because there's such a thing as proficiency in a save.  No net savings in complexity compared to FORT/REF/WILL saves.  Compared to FORT/REF/WILL /defense/, though, there's an increase in complexity.  One you can see everytime something has to give Advantage to attacks but Disadvantage to saves (or vice versa) to represent one effect.   Who wouldn't prefer having combined 3.5 Vancian and Spontaneous casting?   I mean, for years we argued over which was better, now the Wizard automatically gets /both/?  Really not that different from when it was introduced in 3.5, just, well, like the wizard, /more/.   Bounded accuracy is just the Treadmill turned down to 1.  Originally, it was supposed to be no bonus, then 1-3 over 20 levels, then 1-5, finally settled on 2-6.  That's not exactly sticking  to a bold new idea.</blockquote>

Verification