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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
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="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 6001882" data-attributes="member: 54877"><p>I think the "you have to earn the right to play the character you want to play" thing is mostly odd in 2E--and then only because the setting and module assumptions made it odd, not because of rules changes (of course). I don't see this as odd in even early 3E, because 3E very consciously goes to a lot of trouble to make the characters better able to participate and fit from the beginning. </p><p> </p><p>Really, the problem here is that 3E is dealing with the aftershocks of merging the 2E implicit simulation goal while retaining the gamist underpinnings of the original ruleset. That's why 3E is so much more "playable" straight out of the box at the lower levels than the upper ones. It's almost as if they recognized that 1st level characters needed a few more choices and capabilities. Then someone thought, "but if we do that, what do characters grow into?" Their answer is the broken part, as they piled on more and more and more--prestige classes being just a tiny bit of that. </p><p> </p><p>For example, as a thought experiment, I'm fairly comfortable predicting that if you took low-level 3E as a starting point, otherwise unchanged, ripped out prestige classes, and then replaced them with 4E paragon paths and epic destinies (adapted, of course), you'd end up with a better 3E. That's not because the 4E versions are perfect. They aren't. Already I think Next specialties are better. Nor does that indicate that it would solve all 3E issues. It would simply be marginally better than what was there originally, because paragon paths and epic destinies are a better mechanical solution for what prestige classes were intended for. (There's some other stuff that prestige classes ended up doing, that wouldn't be replaced so easily--but then prestige classes were a kludge for things like holes in the multi-classing anyway. The 4E widgets don't help any with that.)</p><p> </p><p>Counter Forge views, I don't find mixing styles to be inherently dysfunctional in play. I think human beings are pretty sophisticated, in practice, at carrying around theoretically incompatible elements--even paradoxical ones. There are limits, and the more they are pushed, the more likely something is to be dysfunctional in practice. However, I think the limits are a lot wider than the Forge credits. Of course, if the purpose of a game is to push against particular limits very hard, then this becomes less true. The more specialized the tool, the less it tolerates alternate uses.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 6001882, member: 54877"] I think the "you have to earn the right to play the character you want to play" thing is mostly odd in 2E--and then only because the setting and module assumptions made it odd, not because of rules changes (of course). I don't see this as odd in even early 3E, because 3E very consciously goes to a lot of trouble to make the characters better able to participate and fit from the beginning. Really, the problem here is that 3E is dealing with the aftershocks of merging the 2E implicit simulation goal while retaining the gamist underpinnings of the original ruleset. That's why 3E is so much more "playable" straight out of the box at the lower levels than the upper ones. It's almost as if they recognized that 1st level characters needed a few more choices and capabilities. Then someone thought, "but if we do that, what do characters grow into?" Their answer is the broken part, as they piled on more and more and more--prestige classes being just a tiny bit of that. For example, as a thought experiment, I'm fairly comfortable predicting that if you took low-level 3E as a starting point, otherwise unchanged, ripped out prestige classes, and then replaced them with 4E paragon paths and epic destinies (adapted, of course), you'd end up with a better 3E. That's not because the 4E versions are perfect. They aren't. Already I think Next specialties are better. Nor does that indicate that it would solve all 3E issues. It would simply be marginally better than what was there originally, because paragon paths and epic destinies are a better mechanical solution for what prestige classes were intended for. (There's some other stuff that prestige classes ended up doing, that wouldn't be replaced so easily--but then prestige classes were a kludge for things like holes in the multi-classing anyway. The 4E widgets don't help any with that.) Counter Forge views, I don't find mixing styles to be inherently dysfunctional in play. I think human beings are pretty sophisticated, in practice, at carrying around theoretically incompatible elements--even paradoxical ones. There are limits, and the more they are pushed, the more likely something is to be dysfunctional in practice. However, I think the limits are a lot wider than the Forge credits. Of course, if the purpose of a game is to push against particular limits very hard, then this becomes less true. The more specialized the tool, the less it tolerates alternate uses. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
Top