Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Deadboy" data-source="post: 5777037" data-attributes="member: 61779">I think that #1 being implemented as one of many options is pretty much guaranteed, #3 has a decent chance of being an one of the options and #2 likely won't be implemented because it will fill a lot of book space for little benefit other than to please the most old school of grognards.As to my opinions on each:1. I hate rolling for my stats. If I wanted a game that's going to make me want to cheat, I'd play Munchkin. Starting everyone out on a level playing fields and ending the &quot;look, I just rolled all my stats and got two 18s while no one was looking!&quot; days was a big step for D&amp;D to me, and I've been playing since 1e.2. Sure, it's more realistic for everyone to learn their professions differently. It's also more realistic for weapons to work differently against different types of armor and for getting hit with a sword to kill a person or at least injure them badly enough they can't fight any more.3. Certain spells or monster abilities spelling certain doom for a player on a single die roll is certainly something that existed in old school D&amp;D, but &quot;defanging&quot; those threats I think was better for the game for this reason - I don't understand why people are so accepting of a sword having to chew through a persons hit points while a spell or petrifying gaze can kill you instantly. Swords can kill people instantly, too. I don't see the logic in made up things that can kill you being more lethal than things that can kill you in real life.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Deadboy, post: 5777037, member: 61779"] I think that #1 being implemented as one of many options is pretty much guaranteed, #3 has a decent chance of being an one of the options and #2 likely won't be implemented because it will fill a lot of book space for little benefit other than to please the most old school of grognards. As to my opinions on each: 1. I hate rolling for my stats. If I wanted a game that's going to make me want to cheat, I'd play Munchkin. Starting everyone out on a level playing fields and ending the "look, I just rolled all my stats and got two 18s while no one was looking!" days was a big step for D&D to me, and I've been playing since 1e. 2. Sure, it's more realistic for everyone to learn their professions differently. It's also more realistic for weapons to work differently against different types of armor and for getting hit with a sword to kill a person or at least injure them badly enough they can't fight any more. 3. Certain spells or monster abilities spelling certain doom for a player on a single die roll is certainly something that existed in old school D&D, but "defanging" those threats I think was better for the game for this reason - I don't understand why people are so accepting of a sword having to chew through a persons hit points while a spell or petrifying gaze can kill you instantly. Swords can kill people instantly, too. I don't see the logic in made up things that can kill you being more lethal than things that can kill you in real life. [/QUOTE]

Verification