Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
Calm down, people can talk about your publicly posted opinion without you.Did you miss this in my post: I'm not going to debate or argue it further, just MPOV since you asked.
Have a nice day.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
5e questions regarding Rate of Fire
- Thread starter WolfhillRPG
- Start date
W
WhosDaDungeonMaster
Guest
You know, you're right, I should "calm down." That is very mature. Thank you very much for respecting my wishes...
I think the "totally different" is a matter of perspective. To me, most of the editions (other than 4E) "felt" much the same. Yes, we switched from backwards math in 3rd edition, how we expressed what our characters were changed, the mechanical bits shifted. On the other hand I just got done playing a PC that was the spiritual successor to my first AD&D dwarven fighter/thief. The difference between the original release and subsequent releases was more pronounced because we lost hobbits, we gained the alignment system and you no longer have to be an elf to be a multiclassed fighter/wizard.
But we're still rolling some oddly shaped polyhedral dice to determine whether we hit, wizards are still casting fireballs, fighters are slapping on armor and whacking orcs. HP still doesn't make a lot of sense, effective bow ranges are still exaggerated and humans are still one of the few races that need light to see in the dark.
As an analogy a Ford Mustang is a completely different car than the original (thank goodness) but it's still identified as the same car because it still targets the same audience and niche while serving basically the same role.
But we're still rolling some oddly shaped polyhedral dice to determine whether we hit, wizards are still casting fireballs, fighters are slapping on armor and whacking orcs. HP still doesn't make a lot of sense, effective bow ranges are still exaggerated and humans are still one of the few races that need light to see in the dark.
As an analogy a Ford Mustang is a completely different car than the original (thank goodness) but it's still identified as the same car because it still targets the same audience and niche while serving basically the same role.
Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
You don't own the discussion? I'm not even asking you to engage, so, totally respecting your wish to not provide further input on the topic. I didn't even quote you on that. You don't get to close out all discussion because you've spoken your last word.
W
WhosDaDungeonMaster
Guest
LOL sorry if I keep checking the thread to see if this has gotten back on topic, but it hasn't. That is what is most annoying honestly. I really didn't want some debate as to what edition should be called what, but I guess I shouldn't expect any better.
The For Mustang is a good analogy. I was thinking of Chess vs 3D Chess myself (BBT fan). Either way, I guess there is no point in checking this thread out anymore.
Later.
The For Mustang is a good analogy. I was thinking of Chess vs 3D Chess myself (BBT fan). Either way, I guess there is no point in checking this thread out anymore.
Later.
Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
1. It's not your thread?
b) you started this sidetrack?
iii - blaming other people for making you post complaints doesn't seem healthy?
You've gotten several answers and some suggestions. Yes, 5E is a different game, no you won't be able to build exactly the same PC without house rules.
So either the thread dies or it meanders off into the wilderness potentially evolving into something unexpected. I don't see why that would be a problem.
WolfhillRPG
Explorer
Well I guess I know how to start a thread that stirs the pot haha.
I was just curious about ROF. At least we had a colourful discussion.
I was just curious about ROF. At least we had a colourful discussion.
Similar Threads
