Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8412005" data-attributes="member: 6779196">No, I understand the magnitude, I just don’t think this is either a serious problem, or unique to 4e.Well, yes, because the mechanics are buried in fluff text - something my players consistently complain about because it makes it difficult to find the information they need about what the spell does.Right, which people also do in 5e, basically whenever they’re playing non-casters. I hear “I attack. 17.” way more often than I hear any kind of description, and I know I’m not alone in that.It doesn’t mean any less than it means in 5e (or any other edition) You have always been able to divorce the fluff text from the mechanics of a spell or ability with no impact on the gameplay. That doesn’t mean the fluff text is meaningless, in 4e or in any other edition.Magic cards don’t separate between the fluff and rules, what are you talking about?Right, 5e is designed to make identifying the mechanical effect of a spell less convenient than it was in 4e. I do agree with you on that.It means what your character is doing in 4e too. And in both editions, players are capable of ignoring the fluff and just stating the mechanics.None of it is needed in 5e either.It’s as important as you make it, which again, is true of every edition.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 8412005, member: 6779196"] No, I understand the magnitude, I just don’t think this is either a serious problem, or unique to 4e. Well, yes, because the mechanics are buried in fluff text - something my players consistently complain about because it makes it difficult to find the information they need about what the spell does. Right, which people also do in 5e, basically whenever they’re playing non-casters. I hear “I attack. 17.” [I]way[/I] more often than I hear any kind of description, and I know I’m not alone in that. It doesn’t mean any less than it means in 5e (or any other edition) You have always been able to divorce the fluff text from the mechanics of a spell or ability with no impact on the gameplay. That doesn’t mean the fluff text is meaningless, in 4e or in any other edition. Magic cards don’t separate between the fluff and rules, what are you talking about? Right, 5e is designed to make identifying the mechanical effect of a spell less convenient than it was in 4e. I do agree with you on that. It means what your character is doing in 4e too. And in both editions, players are capable of ignoring the fluff and just stating the mechanics. None of it is [I]needed[/I] in 5e either. It’s as important as you make it, which again, is true of every edition. [/QUOTE]

Verification