Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
4e death of creative spell casting?
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="Cadfan" data-source="post: 3768157" data-attributes="member: 40961"><p>I know a person who plays 2nd Edition. She, and her entire gaming group, refuse to upgrade to 3rd edition or 3.5 because they feel it "sucked the creativity out of gaming." I've tried to inquire why, because I honestly couldn't figure out how they reached that conclusion.</p><p></p><p>None of them could put it into words clearly. But they all seemed convinced that in 2nd Ed, you could be creative, while in 3rd Ed you were tied down by all kinds of rules that sucked out the creativity.</p><p></p><p>As near as I can tell, what's going on is a difference in play styles. They like a sort of mother-may-I approach to D&D, where they just make up random crazy stuff, and say that they try it. And the DM just decides if it works or not. From that perspective, adding a skill called Balance actually reduces the creativity of the game. Under 2nd Ed, they'd just declare that they were going to balance on something and fight a dragon or whatever, and the DM would decide if it worked, or make up some random die roll based on his ballpark estimate of the chance for success. Under 3rd Ed, they'd be expected to actually have ranks in Balance. If they didn't, their character would fall.</p><p></p><p>From that perspective, I can see why some people might feel 4e is "less creative." By actually codifying things, the ability to make random stuff up and have it work (if your DM lets you) is lost. Accurate, elegant and balanced codification of the rules is therefore a bad thing from this perspective.</p><p></p><p>I understand the reasoning. But, I hate the playstyle. This may be selfish, but if sacrificing those players happiness is what it takes to get me the game I want, where I know my character's abilities and can plan tactically based upon them, then I'm ok with it. </p><p></p><p>I'm sorry for those people who will desparately miss "being creative" by declaring that they're going to use Tensor's Floating Disk as an impenetrable shield against arrow fire or whatever. My vision for D&D doesn't include those folks. But I can recommend a playgroup they might enjoy.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cadfan, post: 3768157, member: 40961"] I know a person who plays 2nd Edition. She, and her entire gaming group, refuse to upgrade to 3rd edition or 3.5 because they feel it "sucked the creativity out of gaming." I've tried to inquire why, because I honestly couldn't figure out how they reached that conclusion. None of them could put it into words clearly. But they all seemed convinced that in 2nd Ed, you could be creative, while in 3rd Ed you were tied down by all kinds of rules that sucked out the creativity. As near as I can tell, what's going on is a difference in play styles. They like a sort of mother-may-I approach to D&D, where they just make up random crazy stuff, and say that they try it. And the DM just decides if it works or not. From that perspective, adding a skill called Balance actually reduces the creativity of the game. Under 2nd Ed, they'd just declare that they were going to balance on something and fight a dragon or whatever, and the DM would decide if it worked, or make up some random die roll based on his ballpark estimate of the chance for success. Under 3rd Ed, they'd be expected to actually have ranks in Balance. If they didn't, their character would fall. From that perspective, I can see why some people might feel 4e is "less creative." By actually codifying things, the ability to make random stuff up and have it work (if your DM lets you) is lost. Accurate, elegant and balanced codification of the rules is therefore a bad thing from this perspective. I understand the reasoning. But, I hate the playstyle. This may be selfish, but if sacrificing those players happiness is what it takes to get me the game I want, where I know my character's abilities and can plan tactically based upon them, then I'm ok with it. I'm sorry for those people who will desparately miss "being creative" by declaring that they're going to use Tensor's Floating Disk as an impenetrable shield against arrow fire or whatever. My vision for D&D doesn't include those folks. But I can recommend a playgroup they might enjoy. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
4e death of creative spell casting?
Top