Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8619235" data-attributes="member: 7032025">I don't remember multi-attack as such, honestly, although some attacks might have been described as such.Seeing that the minions had the same defenses as standard monsters, they were relatively easy to hit, but not more than 50% of the time IIRC.And honestly this is pure absurdity, fights in 5e are way quicker and (at least to us) way more exciting. In our case, when I say "way quicker" we are speaking of a factor of at least 2 and very often 3 and more. We had some fights in 4e (and 3e) that lasted a complete evening, that NEVER happened in 5e except for one specific battle that involved multiple armies in addition to PC actions at multiple places on a huge battlefield. Most fights are over in less than 30 minutes, which NEVER happened with 4e, and we can conduct multiple fights in one evening in addition to spending more time on the other pillars, again something that never happened with 4e. Or actually meshing all the pillars (assassination, pursuit, ambush, flight, etc.), rather than stopping everything else to play a combat mini-game (which was mandatory in 3e and 4e because of the grid).Now, about the "exciting", it's another topic, some people are excited by a technical hard fight where they can show their technical prowess of using the gaming system, others are more excited by a fight that is extremely quick, to the point, integrated in the other pillars, that does not require laying out a grid and counting squares, and/or that resembles the way they have been playing D&D wit TotM ever since D&D existed. I'm not saying one is objectively better than the other, but there are differences and preferences.</blockquote>

Verification