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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Warpiglet-7" data-source="post: 8115157" data-attributes="member: 7025282">A lot has been said in this thread.  There is a lot of assumption about why some players want certain things and often this is immaterial if not just wrong.I am Personally concerned about a game design decision not apparently based on the health of the game in the same way I would be worried about someone using a recipe for a cake not primarily based on taste.  You can have more than one competing motivation, but if it doesn’t taste good in the end, why bake the cake?the simplest point of difference between posters so far seems to be a desire for a class and race based system with clearly defined packages vs. others who want more customization.and then on top of that, a few of us think the class and race based system is a part of D&D’s enduring appeal and brand identity.  I think playing against type gets rolled in here.nowhere has anyone said someone is an asshat for wanting a particular rule change.  No one has said wanting more power is inherently bad. Afterall, if I can get it in one package, it’s not like it is less.  It just looks and behaves in more archetypal fashion.  You can get a 16 primary stat many ways.  In fact all races can ultimately have a 20.Assertions to the contrary are really just some sort of projection.  Personally, I don’t dump a main stat ever.  I like a 16 or better for an attack stat.  I am willing to wait a few levels to make it happen.follow your happiness. Just as importantly find a group that likes the similar things. I don’t think the game will die out as a result of these changes. I don’t think it will flourish because of a solution that finally found a problem, either.I do think it will take time to see how it changes the game overall.  I suspect some of us like things as they are.  That preference is every bit as valid as any other.the full impact won’t be felt this edition. I think if this anything goes becomes standard in 6e, we will get a better idea.I have rejected some changes over time and whole editions and embraced others. Ultimately, no big deal. Can do it again. Would have preferred they saved it for 6e but suppose this is the first foray.And yet still laugh at the doublespeak of Crawford about the problems that had to be addressed.  Yeah, the game has been tanking and people are leaving in droves....what?</blockquote>

Verification