D&D (2024) 4e design in 5.5e ?

[Aldarc]

neither here nor there, but I personally do not like the word "surge." It sounds corny to me.

Several fans of 4e have stated in this thread that the name "healing surge" failed to convey the fiction they represented well, so I doubt you'll get much counter-argument on your point here.

 

[darjr]

OR, they decided that some of those innovations were problematic, yet here you are accusing them of being lazy.

Yea, seems counter productive in a thread about 4e design making into the 5e core revision. ugh.

 

[Malmuria]

Several fans of 4e have stated in this thread that the name "healing surge" failed to convey the fiction they represented well, so I doubt you'll get much counter-argument on your point here.

I liked the coffee analogy for what a healing surge does the best. Very relatable. If I ever pull a 4e element into an osr game that I run I'm going to make all healing coffee-based.

edit: or maybe tea-based, for what is a potion but a specific kind of tea?

 

[Aldarc]

Yea, seems counter productive in a thread about 4e design making into the 5e core revision. ugh.

I don't necessarily think that some things 5e did away with were all that problematic (e.g., attack rolls vs. defense).* It was a smooth and intuitive mechanic that streamlined the game and made it overall easier and quicker to run. From what I have seen here, attack rolls vs. defense rarely, if ever, seem to come up in the complaints that people have against 4e. However, the architecture of the two games diverge in some pretty key ways, so it's not as if they could be added to the game. As such, there's not too much, if any at all, that I would want from 4e that I can realistically expect will make its way into the 5e core revision without it becoming a new edition entirely.

* I have seen several people in the OSR community, for example, advocate for magic attack rolls against static saves, only for them to be shocked to realize that this is how 4e did it.

 

[Malmuria]

I don't necessarily think that some things 5e did away with were all that problematic (e.g., attack rolls vs. defense).* It was a smooth and intuitive mechanic that streamlined the game and made it overall easier and quicker to run. From what I have seen here, attack rolls vs. defense rarely, if ever, seem to come up in the complaints that people have against 4e. However, the architecture of the two games diverge in some pretty key ways, so it's not as if they could be added to the game. As such, there's not too much, if any at all, that I would want from 4e that I can realistically expect will make its way into the 5e core revision without it becoming a new edition entirely.

* I have seen several people in the OSR community, for example, advocate for magic attack rolls against static saves, only for them to be shocked to realize that this is how 4e did it.

Save DC (along with some aspects of resting and death saves) is my least favorite core mechanic of 5e.

 

[niklinna]

I liked the coffee analogy for what a healing surge does the best. Very relatable. If I ever pull a 4e element into an osr game that I run I'm going to make all healing coffee-based.

edit: or maybe tea-based, for what is a potion but a specific kind of tea?

Perhaps you've heard of Javacrucianism?

The Litany Against Decaf [or The Bene Cafferit Mantra]
I will not brew Decaf
Decaf is the mindkiller
Decaf brings the little sleep
That leads to total oblivion
I will embrace my caffeine
I will brew my beverages
And let them flow through me
And when they are gone
I will remain...alert

The Mentat Caffeine Mantra
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed,
the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion....

 

[doctorbadwolf]

This is what would happen. Like chewing cardboard over and over and over and over. Chew chew chew chew. Zero flavor. Because in 4e the fluff really means nothing.

There is some very fundamental disconnect happening here, because…what I described doesn’t lack flavor.

In 5e you at least say the name of the spell. And like others have stated the fluff is entwined with the rules because the fluff matters and is part of the rules.

How does the name of the spell grant any flavor whatsoever? “Sacred Flame, 6 damage if they fail.” Is…utterly lacking in any sort of flavor of any kind.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Possibly hot take?

4e short rests make more sens than 5e short rests, and it makes sense for martials to not be able to do special moves over and over, but regain the ability to do them with a 5 minute breather, drink some water, get going again.

 

[Charlaquin]

Possibly hot take?

4e short rests make more sens than 5e short rests, and it makes sense for martials to not be able to do special moves over and over, but regain the ability to do them with a 5 minute breather, drink some water, get going again.

I agree. But I think people took more issue with martial daylies than martial encounter powers.

 

[darjr]

I do think 5 minute short rests in 4e were better than an hour. It worked well in the fiction where, for me, an hour often clashes.