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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zaukrie" data-source="post: 5717665" data-attributes="member: 2057">The reaction to the polls and the examples and the blog in general is fascinating to me. Monte is having a conversation with us, nothing more, nothing less. The polls are not the serious market research. Examples are examples, not strict "this is how things have been, are, or will be". Rules don't make people jerks (or keep them from being jerks). Monte is having an online, non-live, conversation with a subset of the D&D community. That conversation is likely influencing, but certainly not controlling, his decisions on 5E. I'm not sure I understand all the fear and loathing in all the posts all the time.But, maybe that's just because I take every rule (fluff or crunch) as a suggestion for how to play the game. In the game I run, I know the rules less well than anyone else at the table. We mostly follow the rules, but sometimes I fudge them a bit either way. Since this is not a competition, but a cooperative, story telling way to spend 4-6 hours with friends, I don't feel any great need to follow every rule to the letter of the law. YMMV of course, both over how much you follow the rules, and how worried you get over a blog post by a developer.I agree with Tom Tullis, I'd like an "intro" version of D&D I could use to bring in new players, and a set of advanced options that build on that. There are certainly things I'd like to see 5E do differently....like I think teh rules do dilute the feeling of "magic" being magical, and I'd like to see the magic driven classes feel more different from each other somehow, but that's a topic for another thread.</blockquote>

Verification