Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rant" data-source="post: 8450074" data-attributes="member: 7033019">That is a shame. I was hoping the game would just &quot;add more&quot; instead of tinkering with the core mechanics. That's a lot less &quot;compatible&quot; than I had imagined. The Book of Nine swords, for example, added flexible options like Warblade and maneuvers, but didn't change how core fighters or core mechanics worked in 3rd ed (though they received more options, with feats to learn styles and stances). Adding new rules for social and exploration systems doesn't require changing basic combat rules, spells, feats, etc. It could have been a truly compatible &quot;addition&quot; to the rules, not an alternate rule set altogether, easily. I was hoping for something along those lines, in terms of rules - additions, not incompatible changes. The changes to a bunch of basic mechanics, feats and spells means its not nearly as &quot;compatible&quot; as I had hoped. It's actually a much more sweeping change that what Pathfinder did to 3.5 D&amp;D, and possibly less compatible with 5e than PF1 was with 3.5 D&amp;D content, factoring in all of the changes to core rules, feats, and spells. Oh well, too late now. Obviously, people can house rule any system, but the best systems don't require much of that. Press The Attack and Fall Back are flawed enough I would have to remove them both from gameplay altogether. I was hoping to give the system a run, but since it's not actually &quot;compatible&quot; it can't play alongside traditional 5e classes and builds, so I'd need to start a new game altogether that's &quot;exclusively&quot; Level Up, instead of adding Level Up elements to an ongoing 5e game. I might still do that to get some mileage out of the purchase, but it's a lot less enticing after reading the actual rules. Alternatively: A game where the &quot;core 5e players&quot; use the core 5e versions of things like spells, feats, and magic items, alongside Level Up versions who have access to the Level Up versions, still could be interesting. The core 5e Wizard would have a better Counterspell, Fireball, etc., the core 5e Barbarian has a better Polearm Master, all core 5e characters have better Bags of Holding, etc., and Level Up characters have access to their own suite of tools, crits that multiply static modifiers, etc. That might be do-able. A lot of the balance of core 5e classes ties in with how they synergize with the existing feats, spells, and magic items. Such a game just wouldn't allow mix-and-matching. That might be the way I'll go with it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rant, post: 8450074, member: 7033019"] That is a shame. I was hoping the game would just "add more" instead of tinkering with the core mechanics. That's a lot less "compatible" than I had imagined. The Book of Nine swords, for example, added flexible options like Warblade and maneuvers, but didn't change how core fighters or core mechanics worked in 3rd ed (though they received more options, with feats to learn styles and stances). Adding new rules for social and exploration systems doesn't require changing basic combat rules, spells, feats, etc. It could have been a truly compatible "addition" to the rules, not an alternate rule set altogether, easily. I was hoping for something along those lines, in terms of rules - additions, not incompatible changes. The changes to a bunch of basic mechanics, feats and spells means its not nearly as "compatible" as I had hoped. It's actually a much more sweeping change that what Pathfinder did to 3.5 D&D, and possibly less compatible with 5e than PF1 was with 3.5 D&D content, factoring in all of the changes to core rules, feats, and spells. Oh well, too late now. Obviously, people can house rule any system, but the best systems don't require much of that. Press The Attack and Fall Back are flawed enough I would have to remove them both from gameplay altogether. I was hoping to give the system a run, but since it's not actually "compatible" it [I]can't [/I]play alongside traditional 5e classes and builds, so I'd need to start a new game altogether that's "exclusively" Level Up, instead of adding Level Up elements to an ongoing 5e game. I might still do that to get some mileage out of the purchase, but it's a lot less enticing after reading the actual rules. Alternatively: A game where the "core 5e players" use the core 5e versions of things like spells, feats, and magic items, alongside Level Up versions who have access to the Level Up versions, still could be interesting. The core 5e Wizard would have a better Counterspell, Fireball, etc., the core 5e Barbarian has a better Polearm Master, all core 5e characters have better Bags of Holding, etc., and Level Up characters have access to their own suite of tools, crits that multiply static modifiers, etc. That might be do-able. A lot of the balance of core 5e classes ties in with how they synergize with the [I]existing [/I]feats, spells, and magic items. Such a game just wouldn't allow mix-and-matching. That might be the way I'll go with it. [/QUOTE]

Verification