Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
5E as a Rewritten 4E with Flavor Bits from Other Editions?
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="lkj" data-source="post: 5799477" data-attributes="member: 18646"><p>You might be right. I just can't tell from the information so far. </p><p></p><p>I also like, or at least don't mind the loss of verisimilitude, with some of the metagame mechanics. And I liked the ease of play and usually didn't have a problem with finding in game explanations. </p><p></p><p>But others in my group did. They just had a hard time with martial dailies and some implementations of the warlord class. Some really missed a wizard having a real spellbook. Didn't like the similar structure between classes. Didn't like the mention of roles.</p><p></p><p>Another guy in my group-- someone I sympathize with more-- had a problem with the 1/2 level progressions. He just didn't like that everyone got better at everything regardless of training. Sure, we made the 'adventurers are special' argument and I houseruled fairly often to make more aspects of skill use be trained only. But I did see where he was coming from.</p><p></p><p>We all like the ease of play and not having to worry as much about optimization and feeling like certain characters become useless in certain situations. But it had a tendency to feel a little forced at times.</p><p></p><p>It's an intangible and irrational thing. You want your game of fantasy-- with monsters and spells and all sorts of other absurd stuff-- to feel 'real'. Not really real, but certain folks don't want to be reminded that things are structured a certain way to make the mechanics work smoothly. They want something that feels like it has a certain internal consistency that isn't just about making the math work out. </p><p></p><p>In the end, everyone in my group came around and started enjoying the play. People got over the things that annoy them. But I can assure you there will be those in my group who really welcome losing the metagame mechanics you mention. (Not all-- we all appreciate healing surges and martial encounters and such. We like fighters being more interesting).</p><p></p><p>The thing is, I'm basically the 4e fanboi in my group who pointed out-- over and over again-- that some of the things that bothered them were perfectly present in earlier editions. It just wasn't as obvious. I fully believe a 4e style game can give that same verisimiliitude and feel internally consistent and not make the mechanical necessities obvious. </p><p></p><p>I think the 5e designers agree. They aren't giving up class balance. They are simply 'baking it in', where it won't seem obvious (or at least that's how I read it). They aren't getting rid of at wills or encounters, they are just baking them in in a way that seems less obvious. </p><p></p><p>They aren't discussing 'roles' or 'power sources' or powers-- But I get the feeling those things are there but will be meshed into the flavor better. </p><p></p><p>Shrug. We'll see. I have mixed feelings about some of the skill stuff that came out today. While I don't mind the idea of skills being modifiers around abilities, I worry about it getting to fiddly. While I don't mind the idea of ability based saves, I worry about adding an extra superfluous roll.</p><p></p><p>I'll make more judgments when they open up the playtest.</p><p></p><p>AD</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="lkj, post: 5799477, member: 18646"] You might be right. I just can't tell from the information so far. I also like, or at least don't mind the loss of verisimilitude, with some of the metagame mechanics. And I liked the ease of play and usually didn't have a problem with finding in game explanations. But others in my group did. They just had a hard time with martial dailies and some implementations of the warlord class. Some really missed a wizard having a real spellbook. Didn't like the similar structure between classes. Didn't like the mention of roles. Another guy in my group-- someone I sympathize with more-- had a problem with the 1/2 level progressions. He just didn't like that everyone got better at everything regardless of training. Sure, we made the 'adventurers are special' argument and I houseruled fairly often to make more aspects of skill use be trained only. But I did see where he was coming from. We all like the ease of play and not having to worry as much about optimization and feeling like certain characters become useless in certain situations. But it had a tendency to feel a little forced at times. It's an intangible and irrational thing. You want your game of fantasy-- with monsters and spells and all sorts of other absurd stuff-- to feel 'real'. Not really real, but certain folks don't want to be reminded that things are structured a certain way to make the mechanics work smoothly. They want something that feels like it has a certain internal consistency that isn't just about making the math work out. In the end, everyone in my group came around and started enjoying the play. People got over the things that annoy them. But I can assure you there will be those in my group who really welcome losing the metagame mechanics you mention. (Not all-- we all appreciate healing surges and martial encounters and such. We like fighters being more interesting). The thing is, I'm basically the 4e fanboi in my group who pointed out-- over and over again-- that some of the things that bothered them were perfectly present in earlier editions. It just wasn't as obvious. I fully believe a 4e style game can give that same verisimiliitude and feel internally consistent and not make the mechanical necessities obvious. I think the 5e designers agree. They aren't giving up class balance. They are simply 'baking it in', where it won't seem obvious (or at least that's how I read it). They aren't getting rid of at wills or encounters, they are just baking them in in a way that seems less obvious. They aren't discussing 'roles' or 'power sources' or powers-- But I get the feeling those things are there but will be meshed into the flavor better. Shrug. We'll see. I have mixed feelings about some of the skill stuff that came out today. While I don't mind the idea of skills being modifiers around abilities, I worry about it getting to fiddly. While I don't mind the idea of ability based saves, I worry about adding an extra superfluous roll. I'll make more judgments when they open up the playtest. AD [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
5E as a Rewritten 4E with Flavor Bits from Other Editions?
Top