Search results

To be fair, the people who owned and commissioned 4e considered it a failure, and their opinion on the matter trumps that of the people who designed it. I agree that under any other company the money it made would have made it a success, but then it would likely have made far less, since it...

Yeah, I never did. But we only played 3e for a few years before switching back to TSR's game.

You'd think the core books for D&D would be designed for all people playing that game, not just a handbook for newbies and a bunch of invisible assumptions.

Why do they need to show you statistics to prove their argument but you don't? What makes your opinion above verification or support?

They are strongly discouraged, basically not present at all in the 5.5 rules.

Verisimilitude. That's the purpose they serve. Simulation of a consistent imaginary world.

It is logical, you just don't like the implications. Your feelings about it are valid, but they don't change anything.

Then what happened @EzekielRaiden ? Sounds like WotC did everything right. Did 4e fail due to a series of bad luck circumstances alone? Because we have strong evidence that isn't the case.

I strongly suspect it is. Who else bothers filling out length surveys? That group is always going to be a small percentage of actual customers.

I think there should be more gates between different spellcasting classes, as part of a multi-prong effort to further differentiate types of magic.

I've always loved that book. Man I love 2e!

Ignoring a warlock's patron doesn't really meet setting logic though. You can ignore it, but to me the world starts to feel less real when you do.

Well, since you believe all rules are worthless unless they serve a purpose in the narrative, we're not going to agree on this.

You don't have to go through that whole process with an NPC, so long as the result is something you could have gotten with a PC that went through that process (whether through creation or in play).

IMO, roll for intent is far too abstract to ever pass my setting logic test in your examples.

Some people can do that, but others have a real hard time with the lack of setting logic required to make that concept work.

Why should complexity have to serve a narrative purpose?

Careful! You're scratching at modern D&D's raison de arte! 😉

I would have been happy with something resembling Grandma's Annotated Cookbook from anyone who wants to show off their houserules. The hypothetical "experimental platform" you describe is not what I was envisioning as needed when I asked.

Logic suggests that people who like what they are getting rarely complain about it (much), even if they don't like how they got it. I was fairly happy with 5e when it came out. Given that, I think it's understandable that I didn't complain much at the time. It's when you stop getting what you...