Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8732757" data-attributes="member: 22779">I think this pretty much nails it on the head.Me saying that I don't like how clerics and druids work or that I think that a more standardized class framework, or an addition of a module for social combat, or better (for a given measure of better) mechanics for exploration doesn't mean that I hate D&amp;D and I want it to be only what I want it to be.&nbsp; I'm currently running a 5e game, playing in another and (half assed anyway) prepping a new 5e campaign for my players to play after Candlekeep Mysteries is finished.I'd say it's pretty clear that I'm not going anywhere.But, I do think there are areas that could be done better.&nbsp; But that's the thing.&nbsp; &quot;Could be done better&quot; doesn't mean that the way it's done now is bad.&nbsp; It really doesn't.&nbsp; What's being done now obviously works or we wouldn't all be here.&nbsp; But, D&amp;D has always iterated adjustments.&nbsp; Sometimes it's gone more complicated, sometimes simpler, and the pendulum swings back and forth.&nbsp; It looks, at least a bit, that right now simplicity and streamlining is swinging back into vogue. So, we get things like floating racial ASI's, slimmed down monster stat blocks, possibly a lessening of the short/long rest cycle in favor of using proficiency bonus.&nbsp; So on and so forth.It's all cyclical.&nbsp; A few years from now, we'll be right back on the other side, adding in all sorts of complexity to the game again.&nbsp; It's just the nature of how game design works.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 8732757, member: 22779"] I think this pretty much nails it on the head. Me saying that I don't like how clerics and druids work or that I think that a more standardized class framework, or an addition of a module for social combat, or better (for a given measure of better) mechanics for exploration doesn't mean that I hate D&D and I want it to be only what I want it to be. I'm currently running a 5e game, playing in another and (half assed anyway) prepping a new 5e campaign for my players to play after Candlekeep Mysteries is finished. I'd say it's pretty clear that I'm not going anywhere. But, I do think there are areas that could be done better. But that's the thing. "Could be done better" doesn't mean that the way it's done now is bad. It really doesn't. What's being done now obviously works or we wouldn't all be here. But, D&D has always iterated adjustments. Sometimes it's gone more complicated, sometimes simpler, and the pendulum swings back and forth. It looks, at least a bit, that right now simplicity and streamlining is swinging back into vogue. So, we get things like floating racial ASI's, slimmed down monster stat blocks, possibly a lessening of the short/long rest cycle in favor of using proficiency bonus. So on and so forth. It's all cyclical. A few years from now, we'll be right back on the other side, adding in all sorts of complexity to the game again. It's just the nature of how game design works. [/QUOTE]

Verification