D&D 5E 2024 D&D is 2014 D&D with 4E sprinkled on top

[mamba]

I bet this must give some folks some real difficult cognitive dissonance, intentionally designing 5e to attract fans of WoW who do not know TTRPGs.

why, there were plenty WoW players that never played TTRPGs, same for LotR and GoT. If your conclusion is that you need an approachable game that does not just cater to existing players, it hardly matters what they are a fan of, as long as they are interested in fantasy in a broader sense

 

[EzekielRaiden]

why, there were plenty WoW players that never played TTRPGs, same for LotR and GoT. If your conclusion is that you need an approachable game that does not just cater to existing players, it hardly matters what they are a fan of, as long as they are interested in fantasy in a broader sense

Because "make the game appeal to WoW fans who know nothing of D&D" was, quite literally, one of the most common criticisms of 4e, and to this day, people still slander it as "an MMO on paper" and other such nonsense.

Now, anyone who does that will have to reconcile the fact that the game 95%+ of them love...was explicitly designed with that in mind, per its own lead designer.

 

[Scribe]

I think the fatal sin of 4e, was simply its presentation. I cannot think of many RPGs I bounce off of harder by simply opening the books.

 

[Scribe]

Now, anyone who does that will have to reconcile the fact that the game 95%+ of them love...was explicitly designed with that in mind, per its own lead designer.

Man 95% of people do not love 5e, not even close.

 

[Zardnaar]

4E was more explicit in it's MMO inspiration.

Problem is with actual RPGs is the computer does the hard work for you. Generates the grid, keeps track of positioning, modifiers etc for you.

My first one was 1993 or 1994. Shining Force. Bought fire emblem later and wife got addicted to that.

In the real world imagine trying out 4E as a newbie. All the modifiers, powers and feats.

More modern terms BG3. Try translating that to tabletop. You're going to needs a laundry list of modifiers, good, 3D terrain new items etc. Reverberation anyone?

One reason I suspect for 5.5. Beyond will do more of the work for you.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I think the fatal sin of 4e, was simply its presentation. I cannot think of many RPGs I bounce off of harder by simply opening the books.

Something I've said quite a few times. I don't think it was only presentation--there were issues, though rarely do those issues intersect with any of the typical complaints--but presentation definitely was a big one. I think the problem was, it looked like a "user interface" because it was so crisp and brightly-colored.

Had it been presented in the "Renaissance-man sketchbook"/"Hermetic esoterica text" style, I think it would have been received very, very differently. Especially if slight effort were put into...not so much "obfuscation" per se, as making an active effort to imply a great commitment to high naturalism even if that implication is only skin deep.

 

[Scribe]

I think the problem was, it looked like a "user interface" because it was so crisp and brightly-colored.

Exactly, feeling of a tech manual is immediately invoked.

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

Something I've said quite a few times. I don't think it was only presentation--there were issues, though rarely do those issues intersect with any of the typical complaints--but presentation definitely was a big one. I think the problem was, it looked like a "user interface" because it was so crisp and brightly-colored.

Had it been presented in the "Renaissance-man sketchbook"/"Hermetic esoterica text" style, I think it would have been received very, very differently. Especially if slight effort were put into...not so much "obfuscation" per se, as making an active effort to imply a great commitment to high naturalism even if that implication is only skin deep.

I agree. As someone who did not like 4E at first, but came to like it once I actually tried playing it, one stumbling block was actually the look of it. It looked very minimalist and abstract compared to the older edition books

 

[Aldarc]

I think the fatal sin of 4e, was simply its presentation. I cannot think of many RPGs I bounce off of harder by simply opening the books.

Exactly, feeling of a tech manual is immediately invoked.

This is also strange to me because this is also how OSE reads, and OSE gets praised for its presentation. However, the presentation is pretty technical, reading like a manual, with a lot of similarity with 4e D&D IMHO. Likewise even Shadowdark is pretty sparse.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Something I've said quite a few times. I don't think it was only presentation--there were issues, though rarely do those issues intersect with any of the typical complaints--but presentation definitely was a big one. I think the problem was, it looked like a "user interface" because it was so crisp and brightly-colored.

Had it been presented in the "Renaissance-man sketchbook"/"Hermetic esoterica text" style, I think it would have been received very, very differently. Especially if slight effort were put into...not so much "obfuscation" per se, as making an active effort to imply a great commitment to high naturalism even if that implication is only skin deep.

Nah, the look wasn’t the problem, it was something about the text. I just couldn’t understand how the game was intended to be played. A problem I didn’t have with the 1st edition AD&D books when I was 12. I picked them up and saw immediately how the game worked. And that was just plain text with the occasional line drawing.