Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rhenny" data-source="post: 6463208" data-attributes="member: 18333">I think when I was younger playing 1e and 2e, combat might have been important because I played as a teen and young adult and I didn't really understand what "roleplaying" was.   Kill the monster and take its stuff was the game with an occasional puzzle room or interaction quest that was non-combat related.  I attribute most of that to my own less sophisticated interests at the time.   As I grew up, roleplaying became much more important.   It wasn't really a system thing.  It was my own maturation and the maturation of the groups I played with.Now, I like balancing all that makes D&D, D&D.  3e/3.5e made combat too complicated and building a character was much more of a chore (especially with splat books and burgeoning feats, etc.)  4e made combats too long and seemed to force the DM to make each combat dangerous enough to make everyone take second wind or use healing surges with spells, etc...so combat became so much a part of the game.   For me, 5e makes it easy to balance the pillars and have game sessions of 1 hour, 2 hour, 3 hour or 4 hour, each of which has some interaction, exploration and combat.   Since I tend to balance those aspects, each player will have more of an opportunity to do what his or her PC is good at during most of my games.   It is a win-win situation.</blockquote>