Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8202004" data-attributes="member: 16814">It's fine enough at it.&nbsp; It is a D&amp;D game, after all.&nbsp; Is it as good at it as Moldvay Basic?&nbsp; Nope.&nbsp; 5e?&nbsp; But it's good enough at it to not merit saying it's not good at it. I think that this statement is more that &quot;4e doesn't do dungeon crawling like other D&amp;D editions -- you can't make the same assumptions and have it work well as you can in, say 5e.&quot;&nbsp; This is a truth -- 4e's resolution mechanics are different enough that trying to run an AP from another edition, or just trying to run in that same style, will be painful.&nbsp; That said, a few adjustments to your assumption set and 4e could do just fine.&nbsp; I never had a problem with it, even if I did completely miss that 4e is very compatible with a Story Now style of play.I disagree with this, to a point.&nbsp; 5e was playtested, but the design wasn't open sourced -- the designers designed, and then after that ran a playtest to see if people liked it.&nbsp; The game wasn't designed in playtest, it was just playtested more widely than was (or is) the norm.&nbsp; This gave good feedback to the designers to iterate.&nbsp; The actual design work is still pretty closed.Pet peeve is strong, perhaps 'argument I'm tired of.'&nbsp; As for that claim, please point me at who says this because I'll verbally punch them in the face for saying something so stupid.&nbsp; I'll need your help, though, because I've never seen that said on this board.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8202004, member: 16814"] It's fine enough at it. It is a D&D game, after all. Is it as good at it as Moldvay Basic? Nope. 5e? But it's good enough at it to not merit saying it's not good at it. I think that this statement is more that "4e doesn't do dungeon crawling like other D&D editions -- you can't make the same assumptions and have it work well as you can in, say 5e." This is a truth -- 4e's resolution mechanics are different enough that trying to run an AP from another edition, or just trying to run in that same style, will be painful. That said, a few adjustments to your assumption set and 4e could do just fine. I never had a problem with it, even if I did completely miss that 4e is very compatible with a Story Now style of play. I disagree with this, to a point. 5e was playtested, but the design wasn't open sourced -- the designers designed, and then after that ran a playtest to see if people liked it. The game wasn't designed in playtest, it was just playtested more widely than was (or is) the norm. This gave good feedback to the designers to iterate. The actual design work is still pretty closed. Pet peeve is strong, perhaps 'argument I'm tired of.' As for that claim, please point me at who says this because I'll verbally punch them in the face for saying something so stupid. I'll need your help, though, because I've never seen that said on this board. [/QUOTE]

Verification