Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
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
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Are Essentials more old school or just a clever marketing ploy?
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="Imaro" data-source="post: 5356366" data-attributes="member: 48965"><p>I don't necessarily agree with this assesment, I think it's partially correct but doesn't go far enough IMO. I don't believe that only "new" or "inexperienced" players are the ones who wanted less tactical and option heavy classes. You see there's this great section in the DMG where it lists out all these different types of players and what they enjoy about the game. I think the problem arises in that 4e was designed so that all of those different types had to really be hybrids with "enjoy tactical combat"... especially since tactical combat length was made to take longer at lower levels (and thus color one's first experience with the system about just how much of a game session is devoted to tactical combat) and that just isn't true. </p><p> </p><p>You see the "simpler" builds also allow PC's who don't enjoy tactical combat but enjoy other aspects of the game to play through combat effectively without being forced to delve to deeply into an aspect they may not enjoy as much as others. That I think is one of their biggest draws. When I read stories of Conan, Elric, Corum, Fafhrd & Gray Mouser, LotR, The Companions in the Dragonlance trilogy and so on... at least IMO, it was often more about the story and actual fantasy environs while less about the cool fight moves and tactics. I don't always want to play an intense tactical game (otherwise I'd have always played a Wizard, and I didn't), but that doesn't mean I don't want to play an rpg and it doesn't mean I won't put up with a mini tactical game in order to be a part of the largest rpg community... however I will try to minimize how much I have to be involved in that aspect of the game as opposed to other parts.</p><p> </p><p>As far as feel goes... let me just say that I honestly think the fluff of classic 4e was designed for people who played D&D but didn't want to play D&D... I don't know how else to put it, but i just feel like many of the fluff tropes that made D&D... well D&D were thrown out purposefully and this definitely affected how oldschoolers percieved it as "Not D&D".</p><p> </p><p>EDIT: I am not saying 4e is not D&D I am just elaborating on what I feel may have exasperated that feeling in some.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Imaro, post: 5356366, member: 48965"] I don't necessarily agree with this assesment, I think it's partially correct but doesn't go far enough IMO. I don't believe that only "new" or "inexperienced" players are the ones who wanted less tactical and option heavy classes. You see there's this great section in the DMG where it lists out all these different types of players and what they enjoy about the game. I think the problem arises in that 4e was designed so that all of those different types had to really be hybrids with "enjoy tactical combat"... especially since tactical combat length was made to take longer at lower levels (and thus color one's first experience with the system about just how much of a game session is devoted to tactical combat) and that just isn't true. You see the "simpler" builds also allow PC's who don't enjoy tactical combat but enjoy other aspects of the game to play through combat effectively without being forced to delve to deeply into an aspect they may not enjoy as much as others. That I think is one of their biggest draws. When I read stories of Conan, Elric, Corum, Fafhrd & Gray Mouser, LotR, The Companions in the Dragonlance trilogy and so on... at least IMO, it was often more about the story and actual fantasy environs while less about the cool fight moves and tactics. I don't always want to play an intense tactical game (otherwise I'd have always played a Wizard, and I didn't), but that doesn't mean I don't want to play an rpg and it doesn't mean I won't put up with a mini tactical game in order to be a part of the largest rpg community... however I will try to minimize how much I have to be involved in that aspect of the game as opposed to other parts. As far as feel goes... let me just say that I honestly think the fluff of classic 4e was designed for people who played D&D but didn't want to play D&D... I don't know how else to put it, but i just feel like many of the fluff tropes that made D&D... well D&D were thrown out purposefully and this definitely affected how oldschoolers percieved it as "Not D&D". EDIT: I am not saying 4e is not D&D I am just elaborating on what I feel may have exasperated that feeling in some. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Are Essentials more old school or just a clever marketing ploy?
Top