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="buzz" data-source="post: 3586790" data-attributes="member: 6777">I dunno. I just think web fora present a very skewed picture. With 3.5, I don't feel like I see complaints all that often, and adjudicating AoO in my games hasn't been an issue. Ergo, there's doubt in my mind.Well, I hope not, as I'm not trying to make that connection. What I'm trying to say is that, IME, often when I hear someone complaining about complexity, be it specifically AoO in D&D or something else, what they really seem to be telling me is just that System X isn't giving them what they want. Specific to our discussion, it's not that they want a robust tactical experience, or don't like how D&D provides it, but rather that they don't want a robust tactical experience period, Go-level-simple or not. Naturally, not 100%, but pretty close.Gotcha. All I can say is, it's hard for me to see it, as AoO just doesn't cause problems in my games. Your PC provokes when leaving a threatened square or taking an AoO-provoking action in a threatened square. Done.I'm not saying they're infallible. I'm saying that they spend more time, money, and effort analyzing their marketplace than any other RPG company, period. I think their design staff has also shown that they pay very close attention to what makes for a good play experience. Ergo, I'm betting that the odds would be very, very good that, were AoO fundamentally flawed in some way that hurt the play experience, they would never have survived this long and shown up in as many products. I feel confident that their presence in the new Star Wars RPG is quite telling in this regard.</blockquote>

Verification