Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zardnaar" data-source="post: 7809047" data-attributes="member: 6716779">D&D wasn't D&D for me, if you liked what it offered great, I'm not going to argue against why you like it nor do you need to justify it.You and TOny Vargas to deflect and deny and use very silly examples to try and deflect.I don't like 4E point blank its mostly the class design and things like healing surges and its magic item rules.That is my opinion.I'm not denyiong any experiences you had with say AD&D but going by what is published its not fantasy Vietnam by any means. Can be played that way sure, the occasional adventure is, and death is a bigger threat in most than modern D&D absolutely. But the default is not fantasy Vietnam, I like that its grittier than modern D&D but fantasy Vietnam to me is implying something like DCC, Tomb of Horrors or extreme DM and players who do like that sort of thing.Old Adventures often assumed bigger groups as well, 6-10 or even 20 (OD&D) so if you have a smaller group and don't realize it yeah sure some of those adventures would be brutal. I just read a 1E intro 6-10 people. Crap antagonistic DMs are not a system problem, it may have been a problem in the 80's IDK I wasnt there and its really a YMMV.</blockquote>