Monte Cook and 5e

[Rechan]

Ah.

I think that you may find that you are in a small minority on that one.

If you cannot see the differences then I rather suspect that it is because you don't want to see them. They are fairly obvious to an awful lot of folks.

That's really the argument you're going to take? "I'm right and if you disagree then you're just not accepting it"?

O-kay. Whatever you say.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

That's really the argument you're going to take? "I'm right and if you disagree then you're just not accepting it"?

O-kay.

Pretty much, because trying to explain that a porkchop isn't a steak is not worth spending time describing the difference to someone that claims that they are the same thing.

The urge to yell 'are you blind?!' does no one any real good. If you can't see the difference then why should I waste my time trying to explain the obvious?

In any event, conversation done.

The Auld Grump

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Or, to point out a different perspective:

Conversion from 1Ed to 2Ed was pretty much effortless.

Conversion from 2Ed to 3Ed was complicated enough- despite many surface similarities- that WotC released free conversion guides that eased the process when dealing with the trickier aspects like the unified XP chart.

However, when asked about the release of a similar guide during 4Ed's prerelease, the designers-turned-pitchmen said there would be no such product offered since conversion would be so difficult as to not be worth the effort, and suggested simply starting new campaigns.

 

[jasin]

Really? If you cannot see the difference then I don't think that I can make you see.

I could prepare a long diatribe, and be fair insulting in the matter. But, really, if you can't see then you won't. Take a few turns around these very forums - you have been here for a while. Did you really not see the literally thousands of posts on the subject?

Not really much to discuss then, is there?

 

[Rechan]

However, when asked about the release of a similar guide during 4Ed's prerelease, the designers-turned-pitchmen said there would be no such product offered since conversion would be so difficult as to not be worth the effort, and suggested simply starting new campaigns.

Well that was just a poor choice on WotC's part. Conversion isn't that difficult once you understand the principles you're dealing with. It wasn't easy just starting out - because you would have been trying to interpret 8 years of 3e options with the first 4e PHB. Now, with 3 years of options, it's easy to convert.

3e differed from 2e in many ways. 4e differs from 3e in other ways, but I do not find the difference that drastic.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Well that was just a poor choice on WotC's part. Conversion isn't that difficult once you understand the principles you're dealing with.

To me 4e is different from 3e the way 3e was different from 2e.

And I'm more in accord with TheAuldGrump: too many PCs of mine dating back to 1Ed and converted up to 2Ed, 3Ed, and 3.5Ed for active campaigns would have required extensive reworking/retconning or simply don't convert to 4Ed at all. And of those that were convertable with only a modicum of headaches, few that I can recall really felt the same. Races had different abilities, classes had new mechanics...and had lost some as well.

And I'm not talking about stuff from 3.5Ed's myriad splatbooks- I'm talking about things that existed in the game back in 1986 and were still around in the 3.5Ed's Core3.

 

[Rechan]

And I'm more in accord with TheAuldGrump: too many PCs of mine dating back to 1Ed and converted up to 2Ed, 3Ed, and 3.5Ed for active campaigns would have required extensive reworking/retconning or simply don't convert to 4Ed at all. And of those that were convertable with only a modicum of headaches, few that I can recall really felt the same. Races had different abilities, classes had new mechanics...and had lost some as well.

And I'm not talking about stuff from 3.5Ed's myriad splatbooks- I'm talking about things that existed in the game back in 1986 and were still around in the 3.5Ed's Core3.

All I can say is that my experience is different, and it didn't feel that way for me.

 

[Bedrockgames]

All I can say is that my experience is different, and it didn't feel that way for me.

This is certainly a subjective thing to a degree, but I think the vast majority of gamers who have been here from 1e to 4e found 4e to be the biggest break from previous editions. I suppose it boils down to what aspects of the game you hobe in on. IMO 4e is a much more drastic alteration of the game than 1e, 2e, or 3e.

 

[Plane Sailing]

That's really the argument you're going to take? "I'm right and if you disagree then you're just not accepting it"?

O-kay. Whatever you say.

I'm not sure why you are taking such an argumentative tone - please drop it. Thanks.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Not really much to discuss then, is there?

Sorry if I was overly snippy - I am having connection problems, and had to wait five minutes for the reply box to open.

The difference does seem obvious to me, but, really, I did not need to be snide about it.

It comes down to a difference of risk management (4e) and resource management (3.X). Is this more than we can handle before taking a breather? vs. how many CLW does our cleric have? Is it worth the damage to get bloodied so that my X power kicks in? vs. I'm down to stinking cloud, detect magic, and a scroll of fireball, guys - what say we camp for the night?

Some prefer having healers (clerics) and others do not like having an indispensable character.

Some folks like having assigned roles, other prefer things if everyone in the party is a bit more of a Jack of Trades.

Each game has a bit of both risk management and resource management, but 4e leans more heavily toward risk management per encounter while 3.X is more about keeping an eye on inventory for the day.

The Auld Grump