New Posts For Thread: Survey: I am Very Disatisfied with DnD Next so farhttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29240759/Survey:_I_am_Very_Disatisfied_with_DnD_Next_so_farand the survey itself has made me feel even less hopeful. What I saw and what I experience in the playtest packet was a huge step backward in the progress that 4th edition made. It asked questions about spells for wizards and clerics which suggests tCool. Three spells later when you could no longer do that because you have a small fraction of the known spells of the wizard, you realized that you were wrong.[/quote] Am going to have to count the number of times you two cast what to figure out thhttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29240759/Survey:_I_am_Very_Disatisfied_with_DnD_Next_so_far?post_id=522434019#522434019Cool. Three spells later when you could no longer do that because you have a small fraction of the known spells of the wizard, you realized that you were wrong.[/quote] Am going to have to count the number of times you two cast what to figure out thMon, 30 Jul 2012 11:46:33 -0500To be fair, some of them kind of were. The majority of them weren't so bad, but there were a couple that clearly crossed the line.Still, to say that martial maneuvers shouldn't be allowed because they're too magical would be like saying Vancian spelhttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29240759/Survey:_I_am_Very_Disatisfied_with_DnD_Next_so_far?post_id=522433421#522433421To be fair, some of them kind of were. The majority of them weren't so bad, but there were a couple that clearly crossed the line.Still, to say that martial maneuvers shouldn't be allowed because they're too magical would be like saying Vancian spelMon, 30 Jul 2012 11:24:45 -0500No. For those of us that want to use it, it doesn't need fixing. [/quote]Thjat is a bit of a simplification, at least for some of us. I love the strategical and tactical aspects behind the Vanacian system, although I do agree with most posters thahttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29240759/Survey:_I_am_Very_Disatisfied_with_DnD_Next_so_far?post_id=522428135#522428135No. For those of us that want to use it, it doesn't need fixing. [/quote]Thjat is a bit of a simplification, at least for some of us. I love the strategical and tactical aspects behind the Vanacian system, although I do agree with most posters thaMon, 30 Jul 2012 08:08:47 -0500It's always been that way. Take away flavor and all you have is damage and/or some effect. Thats it. I'm tired of hearing that lame excuse. [/quote]Comparing fighters and wizards in 4e, it's not even true. Strip source and name from the fighter's athttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29240759/Survey:_I_am_Very_Disatisfied_with_DnD_Next_so_far?post_id=522423459#522423459It's always been that way. Take away flavor and all you have is damage and/or some effect. Thats it. I'm tired of hearing that lame excuse. [/quote]Comparing fighters and wizards in 4e, it's not even true. Strip source and name from the fighter's atMon, 30 Jul 2012 03:47:09 -0500I really don't think that's likely. The longest running edition so far has been what, 12 years?[/quote]Part of that was a dead edition because there was no support or new books put out, so you really can't count it as that. Basically from 2E to 3E thttp://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29240759/Survey:_I_am_Very_Disatisfied_with_DnD_Next_so_far?post_id=522410465#522410465I really don't think that's likely. The longest running edition so far has been what, 12 years?[/quote]Part of that was a dead edition because there was no support or new books put out, so you really can't count it as that. Basically from 2E to 3E tSun, 29 Jul 2012 15:10:29 -0500