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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 215056" data-attributes="member: 463">BTW I agree strongly that classes and levels are the core of D&D - if I didn't want them I'd play a different game.  d20 has done a good job of streamlining the stats and skills systems, while retaining the carrot of level advancement and the class system which encourages parties of diverse abilities to work together - although it's now possible to create 'generalist' PCs for those who want them, after a while IMO they're noticeably weaker than a group of single-classed, the best of both worlds.I think attacking D&D for its emphasis on combat, treasure (& magic) grabbing, and level advancement is to attack it for being D&D - fundamentally pointless.  It's fine to make a d20-based game that omits these features (Traveller:The New Era ca 1992 is basically this, albeit it was an sf game), but IMO D&D itself cannot and should not be changed.  I returned to D&D with 3e after several years away during the 2e hell because I wanted a better version of the old game I knew and loved, and I wasn't disappointed.Re the 3e combat system and attacks of opportunity - it's a great miniatures skirmish game.  It's got me painting and using my minis collection again.  Without minis it admittedly does suck. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification