I love 5e, i think the entire game idea was one step in the right idea... but and this is my personal refelction, for me when i say classic i look to the core books, basically phb and dmg... now anything that is added later is good ideas, the problem is in many cases everything gets better and better with every expansion that is tacked on... This gets in my opinion very clear if you compare the basic feats, with for example later feats in expansions... To me it feels like They made 5e, and then they allowed alot of other studios and people to create expansions, and the cheese grew with every new book... so most of it is good idea, it jsut needs to be compromised so it is on same level... or relativly... wich is why im happy with DnD one and the alpha and beta testing iwe done...
So yea, im not sure how to say "classic" more then keeping everything inline with the core books PHB and DMG if that makes sense...
PS and as for the Artificer, yea, that is a rather good example of good idea, but gets utterly broken and over powered at high levels...
PS as for Larians 5e take, its not bad and a computor game will allways turn alittle difrent from table top, but Larian must fix action costs, and fix sneaking and showing lol... that being said, even if its broken i will love the game !
