Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Greg K" data-source="post: 6205425" data-attributes="member: 5038">And, I have had many older players in threads agree with me that the designers have taken a few of the best parts of previous edition, implemented them in the worst way and then combined them with the worst aspects of previous editions and some horrible &quot;new&quot; ideas which, when combined, override the few potentially decent things about NextI don't need to playtest it. The game does not inspire me to playtest it. For my tastes,1. The races I find a step back from some of the better parts of 4e (removing the non-biological parts and making them feats) and the giving of humans +1 to all ability scores is uninteresting.2. The only two classes that I would want to play or have in a campaign that I run are the Land of the Circle Druid and the Mage (not that I find either perfect).&nbsp; I consider the other classes to be pretty pathetic in concept and/or design.&nbsp; Some&nbsp; draw from what I consider to be the worst parts of pre 3e. Others continue to draw from what I consider bad ideas of 3e and 4e and ignore good ideas from pre-3e. Then there are just new mechanics for which I don't care (e.g. Combat Superiority)3. Skills not a fan of the level based proficiency bonus4. multiclassing: I didn't like 3e's multiclassing rules. Ability Scores as implemented is terrible. They also don't address my issues with 3e style multiclassing (and most of them can be addressed using levels 1 and 2 as apprentice levels). So, from a character stand point, there is little that I like. Those issues are going to override the few things that I do like or find intriguing such as Advantage.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Greg K, post: 6205425, member: 5038"] And, I have had many older players in threads agree with me that the designers have taken a few of the best parts of previous edition, implemented them in the worst way and then combined them with the worst aspects of previous editions and some horrible "new" ideas which, when combined, override the few potentially decent things about Next I don't need to playtest it. The game does not inspire me to playtest it. For my tastes, 1. The races I find a step back from some of the better parts of 4e (removing the non-biological parts and making them feats) and the giving of humans +1 to all ability scores is uninteresting. 2. The only two classes that I would want to play or have in a campaign that I run are the Land of the Circle Druid and the Mage (not that I find either perfect). I consider the other classes to be pretty pathetic in concept and/or design. Some draw from what I consider to be the worst parts of pre 3e. Others continue to draw from what I consider bad ideas of 3e and 4e and ignore good ideas from pre-3e. Then there are just new mechanics for which I don't care (e.g. Combat Superiority) 3. Skills not a fan of the level based proficiency bonus 4. multiclassing: I didn't like 3e's multiclassing rules. Ability Scores as implemented is terrible. They also don't address my issues with 3e style multiclassing (and most of them can be addressed using levels 1 and 2 as apprentice levels). So, from a character stand point, there is little that I like. Those issues are going to override the few things that I do like or find intriguing such as Advantage. [/QUOTE]

Verification