Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 5961865" data-attributes="member: 710"><p>Well, we're not really discussing how these games look compared on paper, but how they were received and perceived. And if people ignored level limits and racial restrictions on classes before, then 3E removing them would not feel that different to them. It was just doing what they already did anyway. Just like when most DMs allowed overnight healing in 3E, 4E rules would seem logical. (And in fact, that's exactly what has happened in 3E for us. Not because the DMs handwaved healing, though, but because Wands of Cure Light Wounds were dirt cheap and were so useful for this. So 4E simply handwaving this entirely was an minor change to me in effect.)</p><p></p><p>I believe that moving from THAC0 to attack bonuses was a more significant step then removing level limits. Because it changed the way dice were interpreted and "fighting ability" was expressed. And it is similar to the design shift in 4E from rolling saving throws to rolling against defense (and saving throws as a term be used basically for duration measuring instead of their traditional purpose).</p><p>Introducing encounter and daily powers for every class seems the bigger thing to do and I tend to agree that no edition shift brought such a big change. Encounter powers weren't even a "thing" in D&D before 4E. Sure, Book of Nine Swords tried something like that, but it wasn't a commonly used book then, probably not as common as ignorin level limits. </p><p></p><p>I welcomed this change, but I see why it bothers some people. I don't need that for D&D Next, but I'd take it if I could get it as well.</p><p>This thread isn't about "give me back AEDU" "I want to play 4E with serial numbers filed off". This is about D&D Next appealing to 4E fans. And that doesn't necessarily require these nitty-gritty details. Maybe it does for some, but if you don't want any changes, you can keep playing 4E (hopefully with the tool support still around ).</p><p></p><p></p><p>It requires stuff like keeping an eye out on game balance. </p><p></p><p>Saying magical items give bonsues but we don't require them is fine for me. But I want to know how powerful this item makes a character so I can figure out what kind of challenges i can throw at him. I'd even prefer more (and that's not a 4E appeal thingy, but a MustrumRidcully appeal thingy) if there were no more attack bonuses and defense bonuses from magic items.</p><p></p><p>But if they don't deliver such information, then that's a turn off. I don't want to figure this out in my role as DM. I want the books to guide me here so I can focus on the fun stuff- world building, adventure design, NPC characterizations and motivations. </p><p></p><p>Generally, what D&D 4 offered me were two things</p><p></p><p></p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Ease of DMing<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The monster building rules were simple, and I could still create interesting, flavorful NPCs if I wanted, without jumping too tha many hoops. It was more about thinking how to express a certain story feature in game mechanics, not figuring out how much hit dice it would need to have so my players would feel challenged.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Pre-fabricated monsters and built monsters were easy to use at the table - all information was in the stat block.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Encounter building rules were even simpler than 3E, and gave more reliable results. Just add the XP.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It gave me tools to handle non-combat challenges for the players - not perfect, but better than the utter lack 3E had in that regard. It only knew DCs, not how to combine skill checks into a challenge.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Balanced classes and simple skill acquisiton rules made it easier to create content that would work with all players, without anyone taking the spotlight all the time or being useless.</li> </ul> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Interesting Gameplay<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It didn't matter what class I would play, I was guaranteed some interesting abilities and rich mechanical options.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">My character wasn't defined by his "build" alone, but how he used it in any given situation. This made combat at the table varied. 3E had tons of character build options, but I think it fell flat during the gameplay, since resolving these abilities was straightforward with little variation often.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Roles: I liked the concept of every character having a defined role that he would excel at. This gave each character a clear purpose. I don't need just combat roles, but 3E classes often lacked when they didn't have any real role and couldn't really fulfill any purpose. Monk and Bard were "Jack of All Trades", but really they were only "Master of None". You don't need a Bard to diplomance someone - a Rogue can do this thanks to his skill points. You don't need him as wise sage - the Wizard can do it. You don'T need him as healer, the Cleric is far better. You don't need him for buffs, as Cleric, Druids and Wizard had buffs. (But if there was any role he could reall y hope to achieve well, buffing may have been it.) He didn't need him for fighting, since other classes could fight better, with better AC, damage or attack bonuses.</li> </ul> </li> </ol><p></p><p>There are things I don't necessarily want or stuff I missed.</p><p></p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I don't need long combats. <br /> 4E combats were usually fun, but also usually long. I can do with less time spend on individual combats. As long as I still get a lot of options during the gaming sessions. (So making the Fighter the best at combat if combats are shorter may not really in any way end up being cool, unless maybe combat is so fast and the fighter so powerful that he can resolve a fight alone as quickly as a Rogue can disable a trap)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">World Building Tools<br /> 3E had interesting rules for buildig towns and cities. I liked those. Earlier editions than 4E may have had stuff for gaining followers and more. I would have liked some of it for 4E and I'd like to see something like that for D&D Next. The Leadership feat in 3E was greatly (ab)used by us for world-building by us.<br /> I think these rules really come to their own once it also involves the players - because it makes world-building cooperative. It's one thing for the DM to hash out a city with NPCs. It's even cooler I think if the players can start building their own</li> </ul></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 5961865, member: 710"] Well, we're not really discussing how these games look compared on paper, but how they were received and perceived. And if people ignored level limits and racial restrictions on classes before, then 3E removing them would not feel that different to them. It was just doing what they already did anyway. Just like when most DMs allowed overnight healing in 3E, 4E rules would seem logical. (And in fact, that's exactly what has happened in 3E for us. Not because the DMs handwaved healing, though, but because Wands of Cure Light Wounds were dirt cheap and were so useful for this. So 4E simply handwaving this entirely was an minor change to me in effect.) I believe that moving from THAC0 to attack bonuses was a more significant step then removing level limits. Because it changed the way dice were interpreted and "fighting ability" was expressed. And it is similar to the design shift in 4E from rolling saving throws to rolling against defense (and saving throws as a term be used basically for duration measuring instead of their traditional purpose). Introducing encounter and daily powers for every class seems the bigger thing to do and I tend to agree that no edition shift brought such a big change. Encounter powers weren't even a "thing" in D&D before 4E. Sure, Book of Nine Swords tried something like that, but it wasn't a commonly used book then, probably not as common as ignorin level limits. I welcomed this change, but I see why it bothers some people. I don't need that for D&D Next, but I'd take it if I could get it as well. This thread isn't about "give me back AEDU" "I want to play 4E with serial numbers filed off". This is about D&D Next appealing to 4E fans. And that doesn't necessarily require these nitty-gritty details. Maybe it does for some, but if you don't want any changes, you can keep playing 4E (hopefully with the tool support still around ). It requires stuff like keeping an eye out on game balance. Saying magical items give bonsues but we don't require them is fine for me. But I want to know how powerful this item makes a character so I can figure out what kind of challenges i can throw at him. I'd even prefer more (and that's not a 4E appeal thingy, but a MustrumRidcully appeal thingy) if there were no more attack bonuses and defense bonuses from magic items. But if they don't deliver such information, then that's a turn off. I don't want to figure this out in my role as DM. I want the books to guide me here so I can focus on the fun stuff- world building, adventure design, NPC characterizations and motivations. Generally, what D&D 4 offered me were two things [LIST=1] [*]Ease of DMing [LIST] [*]The monster building rules were simple, and I could still create interesting, flavorful NPCs if I wanted, without jumping too tha many hoops. It was more about thinking how to express a certain story feature in game mechanics, not figuring out how much hit dice it would need to have so my players would feel challenged. [*]Pre-fabricated monsters and built monsters were easy to use at the table - all information was in the stat block. [*]Encounter building rules were even simpler than 3E, and gave more reliable results. Just add the XP. [*]It gave me tools to handle non-combat challenges for the players - not perfect, but better than the utter lack 3E had in that regard. It only knew DCs, not how to combine skill checks into a challenge. [*]Balanced classes and simple skill acquisiton rules made it easier to create content that would work with all players, without anyone taking the spotlight all the time or being useless. [/LIST] [*]Interesting Gameplay [LIST] [*]It didn't matter what class I would play, I was guaranteed some interesting abilities and rich mechanical options. [*]My character wasn't defined by his "build" alone, but how he used it in any given situation. This made combat at the table varied. 3E had tons of character build options, but I think it fell flat during the gameplay, since resolving these abilities was straightforward with little variation often. [*]Roles: I liked the concept of every character having a defined role that he would excel at. This gave each character a clear purpose. I don't need just combat roles, but 3E classes often lacked when they didn't have any real role and couldn't really fulfill any purpose. Monk and Bard were "Jack of All Trades", but really they were only "Master of None". You don't need a Bard to diplomance someone - a Rogue can do this thanks to his skill points. You don't need him as wise sage - the Wizard can do it. You don'T need him as healer, the Cleric is far better. You don't need him for buffs, as Cleric, Druids and Wizard had buffs. (But if there was any role he could reall y hope to achieve well, buffing may have been it.) He didn't need him for fighting, since other classes could fight better, with better AC, damage or attack bonuses. [/LIST] [/LIST] There are things I don't necessarily want or stuff I missed. [LIST] [*]I don't need long combats. 4E combats were usually fun, but also usually long. I can do with less time spend on individual combats. As long as I still get a lot of options during the gaming sessions. (So making the Fighter the best at combat if combats are shorter may not really in any way end up being cool, unless maybe combat is so fast and the fighter so powerful that he can resolve a fight alone as quickly as a Rogue can disable a trap) [*]World Building Tools 3E had interesting rules for buildig towns and cities. I liked those. Earlier editions than 4E may have had stuff for gaining followers and more. I would have liked some of it for 4E and I'd like to see something like that for D&D Next. The Leadership feat in 3E was greatly (ab)used by us for world-building by us. I think these rules really come to their own once it also involves the players - because it makes world-building cooperative. It's one thing for the DM to hash out a city with NPCs. It's even cooler I think if the players can start building their own [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition
Top