Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5791108" data-attributes="member: 996">Or the inexperienced player, or the more heterogeonous or casual group, yes.  It's broadened the apeal and playability of the game enormously, which is a great thing.Not really.  If you're an experienced group and on the same page about what you want, it's pretty easy to take a balanced system like 4e and add back the imbalanced elements you want for your campaing.  Breaking is much easier than fixing.Well, you might try it some time, with 4e, and even with Essentials+ as low level (which is what you get at D&D Encounters) the system is up to the challenge.  I've played games at conventions since the 80s, and AD&D con games could be a real crap shoot, you might get a good DM or one not up to the challenge of running the system, you fellow players could bring in who-knows-what off the wall characters, and rule issues were guaranteed to eat up a lot of play time.AD&D's need to be 'fixed' made it a much better game for the stable home group using extensive house rules than for casual play.  In spite of that, it got used for casual play a lot because of name recognition.  New players wanted to try D&D, because they'd never heard of other (better) systems.  Who knows how many potential RPGers were lost because they were repelled by bad first experiences?</blockquote>