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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scribble" data-source="post: 5356682" data-attributes="member: 23977">Sure- I'm not saying everyone has to agree- just how I felt.I'm also not trying to get into a which game feels more oldschool argument or anything. Not even trying to compaire the two games.My only point about 3e was that with 4e, rather then base 4e on updating 3e, it feels to me like they went back to 1e/2e and updated those rules, using info they learned in 3e.  Again I'm not talking about specifics just the idea here.I'm not saying the 1e fighter was a defender or a striker or whatever. Just that 1e classes in general had a definite "place" in the rules of the  game.  Sure- we can say it's an opinion thing. To me it feels more oldschool because the oldschool idea was a lot more was happening in a round then just what you rolled for.  I've never looked at the game as mapping straight to the rolls... To me that feels too... robotic, and doesn't feel natural.It's a personal thing I guess. I'm not talking about just players deciding to do stuff after combat. In 1e there was something that was like an official rule that said basically any time left in a full turn after a fight is spent doing this stuff..I can't remember exactly, and my 1e Dm's guide is packed away in a box somewhere- but basically if you used say 3 rounds out of the turn, the rest of the rounds were spend by the rules doing x... Something like that.  That's all-  a codified by the rules amount of time after a fight thing- it just feels like a similar idea to me. (Like they might have taken the rule and expanded on what it actually does.)  Shrug- that sounds cynical. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue    :P"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" />I like it from a easier to design/run monsters standpoint. I don't need all the stuff PCs can do for monsters.I also like them being different because to me at least, it makes them seem more wondrous... They're alien, and function in suprising and unexpected ways.I know others differ.  Sure- but that's not so much the part that feels oldschool to me. It's more the idea that it's type doesn't determine what it can do, or how tough it is, et al.Roles function in a similar veign to how "types" worked in 3e. I think it's the same idea but to me it feels closer to oldschool to have role determine the stuff instead of type.How so? Rituals are still a part of Essentials, and will be expanded with the upcoming book. And don't forget in 1e there were scrolls just about anyone could cast, manuals anyone could use, etc.Again keep in mind I'm saying it feels like an oldschool idea that was expanded on.  Like someone saw the mention of tomes and manuals and scrolls anyone could use- and said hey, this is my interpretation.  Houserulling isn't really the best word admittedly. I mean more along the lines of DM rulling on the fly.</blockquote>

Verification