[quote=Smilodon Actual]
I did indeed watch Spoony's review, and as much as I love Spoony and admire his reviews, I can't say I agree with his approach for 5e - and, fortunately, he even admits he has the more historical lens focused on it rather than the post 3.5e/4e one.I can't speak for 2e, and even less so for 1e, but 5e seems to have the balance of novelty that came from a plethora of options in 3.5e, and the simplicity of 4e. Even more unusually, they some how boiled down an already simple game (4e) even more and put the perspective much more heavily on roleplaying and less on number crunching. Some elements just work well together, and those that don't aren't soul crushingly bad (90% of true gish builds in 3.5e for example) and it seems to have drifted away from the issues of progression between tiers of content.It comes down to, I suppose, what you want more of and can put up with. If anything 5e feels like a better successor to 3.5e than 4e does, but isn't as much a incoherent mess as any other updates to 3.5e from my experience.The only "bad" I've experienced thus far with 5e is how the current modules are still very much the "X, Y, Z" options when it comes to choices, but they're at least more... well, I suppose dynamic than 3.5e ones.
[/quote]

They're lore description and halfling/gnome artwork certainly doesn't work well though... *shudders*
I mean like Spoony highlighted with the Paladin, a new person just wants to know what the class is. Not 3+ paragraphs about shiny armor.

I'm all for the attempt of simpler mechanics and better roleplay, but it's hard to execute in practice. And like I said before, some mechanics they did like advantages or no tiles even just wouldn't work. The former turns the entire game into a tug-of-war, and the latter just makes it not even feel like a table top as much anymore. I can see it working, but I don't see why it's not even a option.