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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Falling Icicle" data-source="post: 6171881" data-attributes="member: 17077">No. I like making characters. I like crunch, and exploring different ways to optimize my character. I'm not the only one. Lots of people enjoy character optimization. I enjoy having a wide range of choices. I DO NOT enjoy having the same cookie-cutter character as everyone else and not getting to make hardly any meaningful choices about my character until level 3, and hardly any after that. Race, background, class are just not enough choices for me at level 1. Not even close! What about fighters, who dominate combat, but suck at the other 2/3 of the game: interaction and exploration? They don't really have the potential to contribute in most situations. It's one thing for certain classes to be a bit better than others in certain areas, but the problem is you have some classes that greatly excel at exploration or interaction and other classes that can barely participate at all.Okay, this one is true.No. I don't like having to burden myself with making up a bunch of rulings as the DM. I want the rules to be as clear and concise as possible, so that I don't have to rule by fiat very often.What about 4e? 4e definitely worked. It was a pretty well designed game, and the most balanced version of D&D to date. But many people still hated it. Why? Because it didn't work the way they wanted D&D to work. People don't mind if the game supports many different playstyles, but only as long as it supports theirs. Otherwise, they'll just find another game that does. I'm not trying to edition war here, I'm just pointing out that having a set of rules that works isn't good enough for everyone, and people very much are attached to specific ways of doing things. That's why so many people still play older editions.</blockquote>

Verification