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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TerraDave" data-source="post: 3912514" data-attributes="member: 22260">Each adition has been a little different...for example, 3rd edition opened the door to churning out campaing specific feats and prcs, and the domain system worked pretty well for religion (and was more workable then the ambitious specialty priest system of 2nd edition). It was fun for a while (and cool when it actually got into play). But it was so easy...we got flooded with it. For 4th edition, I will probably do less of that (though who knows). In some ways, I see the changes helping things: more flexible cosmology, more flexible alignment, paladin changed to a more general holy warrior type....clearer roles for pcs and monsters...but there is a lot we don't know. Yes, some of the flavour has been a drag. But it seems to be a small part (at least the names) of the overall package. And from my own experience, the big lesson is that the DM really has a lot of control, including on flavour. How you names things, describe things, what is encountered, the twist you put on things, can be very effective, and it really is up to you. Plus players often don't even notice things you (or other messageboard posters) may find terribly inconsistent, illogical, ill-fitting, or fitting into the "bad wrong fun" catagory. The "how things must work" arguments and advice you may see--at least at the broad world and campaing level--probably don't matter that much, except to the extent that they effect your own experience as a DM. They will normally also go along with "crunch" level decisions (you decide no dragon-blood) as long as they have plenty of other options and don't feel you are trying to "get them". What was the point of all this...edition doesn't matter as much as just doing what you want, and having the confidence to get away with it.</blockquote>

Verification