Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 6681761" data-attributes="member: 59082">@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=996" target="_blank">Tony Vargas</a>. Regarding the relative complexity of different editions, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. You can continue to angle it and squint just right to support this view that 5E is complex, but the bottom line for me is how it plays at the table, and 5E is more simple than 3E or 4E. There's just less book-keeping all around, character creation and advancement is far simpler, less modifiers to deal with, feats as optional, etc. And yes, more DM adjudication is a part of that, at least for me.You also seem to be willfully ignoring the fact that, as I said (and you didn't respond to) there was far more product for 4E a year in. You keep talking about "at release" or "at its bloatiest." First of all, "at release" all editions are the same in terms of products: the core three, plus maybe one other product. I think the most we could say is that at release 5E is a more complete game than 4E was, with more classes and races to choose from, etc; it was designed without endless splats in mind, to be relatively complete at release. And we haven't seen 5E at its bloatiest yet, so there's no point in comparing that. But what we can compare is how these different editions look a year into their cycles, and 5E is far leaner than 3E or 4E.</blockquote>