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: 7674494" data-attributes="member: 996">No one ever pointed out that you were in a forum, devoted to a game you didn't, play, just complaining about that game?  I remember the edition war.  H4ters were told that every day.  It didn't dissuade you, did it?  Abdul isn't doing anything as counter-productive or intellectually dishonest as what was going on in the edition wars.  It's hypocritical of you to try to take some sort of high ground and tell him he's out of line.   Maybe the internet just magnified it, that time.  But, 3.x did get some grognard backlash, including talking points, like 'grid dependence' that were recycled for the edition war.  And, there was a split, between 0e fans who took up Arduin, and those who adopted or started with Basic or AD&D.  You just couldn't get a good flame-war going in Out on a Limb. I was mostly on the Wizards site, but here, too, yeah.  ENWorld was a little less vicious, and leaned to the h4ter side a bit, while Wizards leaned 4venger.  Besides, Abdul, you, & I /are/ grognards.  We're the old guard who have been with D&D since the fad years, if not a few years before.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  You don't remember the various spells in AD&D that required concentration throughout, nor the concentration needed to cast spells, or the way either sort was broken by any damage, and impossible when prone, riding a mount, or walking at a normal pace? Ever play 3.5 in E6 mode?  And, yes many games have much less dramatic character advancement.  Though both are much more profound than Bounded Accuracy.  The main difference between BA and 3.5 or classic D&D is not the size of the numbers (which, sure, or smaller, but that's little more than cosmetic), but the fact that those ability bonus and proficiency numbers are the same scale for everyone.  Putting ability bonuses on the same scale was an early-90s innovation found in TRS Gamma World, and adopted by D&D with 3.0, as was putting all classes on the same experience/level table.  Taking BAB, save DCs, skills &c, and putting them all on the same level-based scale regardless of class (which is what 5e Bounded Accuracy's proficiency bonus /is/), was, of course, a 4e innovation.  4e just did it with bigger numbers over more levels. Or a low level one with Sleep. In 3.x, defenses rose rapidly with level, mostly via huge 'Natural Armor' bonuses for monsters, and magic items for PCs.  In classic, while PC AC could get very high (at any level) if festooned with magic items, Monty-Haul style, there was no level progression for AC, either among monster or PCs.  In 5e, that progression is just small.  And 3.x already made orcs a legitimate enemy for high-level characters - by letting orcs level.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> Nod.  It was nice when RuneQuest came up with it 35 years ago, too.   Though the big problem was that the Christmas tree effect was needed in most editions, to keeps certain classes relevant at higher levels.  5e did step back from that, in theory, in not 'baking in' magic item bonuses.  Some sub-classes would still need magic items to keep up in other areas, though. You may not have noticed them in prior editions (or other games) but they were out there.   Well, if by 'previous editions' you mean 3.x/Pathfinder - and discount B/X (which you've already mentioned, so I'm guessing you don't discount it), not to mentions the many variations under which classic D&D tended to be played.  5e looks rules-lite compared to 3.x/Pathfinder.  If you only compared the core 3 books, though the difference would seem a lot less pronounced.  And it's not anymore elegant in design than 3.0 was. I did get to play a Dragonwrought Kobold Loredrake once, so yes, a few.  5e gets away with repeating some the mistakes of the past, because it's been lucky enough to avoid that particular mistake, thanks to the way it evangelizes for DM Empowerment.  A determined DM can make up for a lot.Speaking of unique times in D&D history that will probably never be repeated.... hopefully the RAW thing doesn't become a pendulum.  But, it so seems like the kind of thing that could be...</blockquote>

Verification