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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 6268960" data-attributes="member: 6698278">I do not believe that everything has to be in a module.  I do believe though that on the most bitter of issues like the nature of hit points the game should not have a default.  The game should give us two or three modules and tell us to pick one based on the nature of our campaign.  DMs should be advised in the DMG about playstyles and why they might want one or the other.  I think DoaM is a hit point definition issue more than it is a simulation issue.  While many who want traditional hit points are also sim advocates I do not think it is necessary or true all the time.There are a lot of things in the game that I do not like or would have done differently.  For example, I'd like a wizard with daily only powers and no at-will cantrips.  I know I won't get that and I'll probably live with it.  I can also recognize that a clear majority likely want the cantrips.  So if I do ban cantrips I won't feel like I'm being ignored as a customer.I do though draw a line in the sand on hit point definition.  I know that there are as many or nearly as many or more people who view hit points in my way as the other way.  So I need a module.  I'd prefer no default because the playerbase is very split.  If the game was released as the last packet without any modules then I wouldn't buy it.  I can't in good conscience support a game that is trying to put out of business other games that actually do consider my preferences.  I want to support D&D but if WOTC completely ignores me then I can't support them anyway.  I did that with 4e for a while out of ignorance but I won't do it again.</blockquote>

Verification