Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 6007740" data-attributes="member: 6698278">I'm for compromise.&nbsp; But I'd rather it be in the form of modularity and not rules done half-way.&nbsp; The reason is that I can't play with plot coupons.&nbsp; I'd honestly just rather go play monopoly.&nbsp; D&amp;D is a commitment that far exceeds normal games.&nbsp; I'm the DM by the way most of the time.&nbsp; And for my style of game it takes a pretty high time commitment.&nbsp; And I'm not complaining but when I run a campaign it has to be really good for me.&nbsp; I don't want to feel like I'm playing a boardgame.&nbsp; Dissociative mechanics give me that feel.&nbsp; I can't take the world or the characters in it very seriously.&nbsp;&nbsp; Since I've been doing this a long while, I have players that enjoy similar approaches.&nbsp; I give them what they like and we all have fun.&nbsp; I don't mind a bit if others play a different way.&nbsp; My issue right now is that I feel the CS dice are dissociative.&nbsp; And that is on the fighter class!&nbsp; If it were the warlord or the xyz class I'd just ban that class.&nbsp; Kind of hard to ban the fighter.&nbsp; If I bother with 5e, and I'm on the fence right now, I'll probably rewrite the CS dice rule.&nbsp; Or if I'm lazy I'll just say &quot;damage only&quot; simple fighter.&nbsp; My fighter players have never complained that the fighter is boring.&nbsp; I am writing my own set of rules, which is hard by the way, and if that reaches some level of usability I might go that way.&nbsp; There are a lot of &quot;minor&quot; things that I accept about D&amp;D and I could fix them all if I did it myself.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Emerikol, post: 6007740, member: 6698278"] I'm for compromise. But I'd rather it be in the form of modularity and not rules done half-way. The reason is that I can't play with plot coupons. I'd honestly just rather go play monopoly. D&D is a commitment that far exceeds normal games. I'm the DM by the way most of the time. And for my style of game it takes a pretty high time commitment. And I'm not complaining but when I run a campaign it has to be really good for me. I don't want to feel like I'm playing a boardgame. Dissociative mechanics give me that feel. I can't take the world or the characters in it very seriously. Since I've been doing this a long while, I have players that enjoy similar approaches. I give them what they like and we all have fun. I don't mind a bit if others play a different way. My issue right now is that I feel the CS dice are dissociative. And that is on the fighter class! If it were the warlord or the xyz class I'd just ban that class. Kind of hard to ban the fighter. If I bother with 5e, and I'm on the fence right now, I'll probably rewrite the CS dice rule. Or if I'm lazy I'll just say "damage only" simple fighter. My fighter players have never complained that the fighter is boring. I am writing my own set of rules, which is hard by the way, and if that reaches some level of usability I might go that way. There are a lot of "minor" things that I accept about D&D and I could fix them all if I did it myself. [/QUOTE]

Verification