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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6569834" data-attributes="member: 82106">Oh, I don't think it has to be exactly the way it is. I'm sure it could be better. Some of the ways it could be better, conjecturally, might be perceived as 'more like earlier editions'. I can even give examples:1. Why does 4e have 30 levels? I think there was an initial concept that heroic and paragon would be "what people play", the levels equivalent to levels 1-20 in say AD&D where by level 20 you can mess a bit with the weaker divine beings. Then apparently they were dedicated to fleshing out 'epic play' as a kind of new thing and levels 21-30 appeared. The end result was a game with 10 more levels than classic D&D, but covering pretty much the same ground in the final analysis. I think those extra 10 levels were a mistake, make the game 20 levels total, or 21, with 19-21 being 'epic', and 1-20 containing the material currently in most of the existing 30 levels. More like old D&D and better all around.2. Why didn't they make a power that corresponded with pretty much every spell in the old spell lists (at least say the 1e PHB, with perhaps a few of the less interesting ones thrown out if you must). I never understood the deliberate moving away from existing familiar time-worn elements like that which seemed to have little purpose, except it raised the hackles of a lot of people.3. Why not have had schools of magic lifted right out of 2e from day one? There are other ways that implement mastery-like stuff could still be included, like feats or just wrapped up in the implement type rules themselves. Again, what was the purpose of the loss of familiarity?4. Why the new pantheon? Its fine, but they could have just used a subset of the WoG 'default' previous editions pantheon, and they could have included some better priest spheres while they were at it. Yet again, its more familiar.5. Though I personally really like the mix of classes in PHB1 they could have put the bard and the druid in there on day one. Yes, the warlord and the warlock would have had to wait for PHB2, and the warlord is awesome, but it would still be just as awesome released a few months later. The warlock OTOH was kinda half-baked to start with anyway, it would have benefited from a few more months of work.I'm sure there were reasons for all these things and others, but plenty of things could have been 'more like the old days' and not really impacted the game as a whole that much. There could have been a more abstract alternate combat system too. I wouldn't use it, but it would assuage the chapped feelings of a whole bunch of players.</blockquote>

Verification