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="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9700996" data-attributes="member: 7023840">Eh, don't want a thread derail, but I am curious about this.Based on my experience so far, I don't think 5e24 is broken. I do think that it provides (for lack of a better term) a clean reset in 5e. I also think that like a lot of ... let's say "revisions," it has the problem that a lot of people who have spent a decade with 5e haven't grasped that some of the revisions look and sound similar, but are different, than what 5e had. I mean- I just had a post a little while ago with a dive into the grapple and TWF rules, which look so similar at first, but are wildly different, than the old 5e rules. In other words, I don't think that it is broken at all. I appreciate that it was cleaned up in many aspects. That said, it's still, basically, 5e- which means that fundamental issues with the design space (for example, limited design space for subclasses ... with an apparent mandate of no new classes), with the overreliance on spells and magic (class abilities are almost all defined in terms of spells; new classes, such as the psion, are also defined in terms of spells), overlapping spells and spell lists and access allowing for customization but also a sense of sameness, and so on ... they are all still there. In other words, and IMO, I think of 5e24 as a better version of 5e, but they didn't take the opportunity to try and address some of the underlying issues. And those underlying issues (especially the design space issue) are, IMO, what lead to the feelings of "eh, so mid" when we see the proposed subclasses and options they are presenting.IMO, YMMV, etc.</blockquote>

Verification