Originally Posted by Kendaric
Originally Posted by KLSLS
Originally Posted by Qoray
It also means that you have to remember a thousand little things at all time, which you can not do for this or that reason, instead of the game taking that annoyance from you, and just preventing you from doing it.
If the things we're talking about are meaningful enough they surely aren't that easily forgotten.

If you want to compare having the burden of simply stoping yourself from doing things you don't want to do, with outright removing options that some people might enjoy, the former is clearly the lesser evil. In cases like this, some of you people should just work on your own willpower instead of demanding the world to limit our options just so they align with how you personally like to play.

No one talked about removing anything. We are talking about a separate game mode or having entirely optional toggles that would enable us to get closer to 5E core rules.

In that case I'd agree with you, I should have made it clear in my previous post: my opinion is that if you could only have one or the other, the self-restraint option is the lesser evil, but if we could choose either ruling, there wouldn't be the need to settle for the lesser evil since both parties could be satisfied. But to be honest, I'm not too hopeful about this happening.

Originally Posted by Kendaric
Certainly you have the willpower not to toggle those optional features on or not to play on such a gamemode?

Of course I do, otherwise I'd be a hypocrite.


Originally Posted by booboo
The player not using a feature is only half the issue - the other half is that the game system will have no such constraints and will use all these abusive tactics or OP stats etc against the player, like BA shove, potion lobbing etc. You cannot do a thing about that (*).

(*)I am not convinced that mods can simply fix everything - at the very least, they may ruin the challenge in encounters if those encounters have been designed with specific game-y tactics in mind. I doubt Larian have been play-testing with. say, an action economy rebalance mod - so now you may have an inferior gaming experience simply because you want something that is more rules compliant. I dunno - I find that rather a bad alternative.

At some point you have to consider that Larian are making the game they want to make, they have their own vision which clearly differs from the core rules in a few aspects, since these changes are not accidents but deliberate tweaks. What you seem to suggest here is that they make the game they want to make, and then readjust a significant part of it to fit a ruleset they decided not to follow. If they end up doing that, adding a core mode and rebalancing the encounters, props to them, but I don't think that's very likely to happen.

On another note, if core rules are at some point properly introduced through mods, I'm sure a rebalancing of the encounters and other aspects would follow naturally.