Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9579957" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Sure, I'd certainly grant that it is more tactically bland than 3e. But &quot;it's 3e but blander&quot; would still seem to be an admission that it's more similar to 3e than anything else.For comparison, everything I've ever heard about mid- to high-level 2e combat is that it very quickly devolved into &quot;do you have the spells to overcome your enemy's protections and thus obliterate them, or can they overcome your protections first?&quot; type stuff, because high-level magic was stupidly OP back then. By comparison, 5e very intentionally took 3e magic and toned down the power of the upper end, while boosting the power of, and access to, the lower end.3e and 5e are definitely the most &quot;high magic&quot; editions. And yes, that means I'm saying 4e is not as high-magic, because...it isn't! There were rules for running a 4e game where magic was genuinely nonexistent, though you might have some struggles with certain kinds of things (e.g. large numbers of minions) unless you permitted some of the &quot;kinda magical, kinda not&quot; stuff (like the controller variant of Ranger, can't recall if that was the Hunter or the Scout).You just couldn't resist, could you?You just couldn't resist doing this yet again. You, specifically, were one of the people I thought of when I said it wasn't possible for us to have a conversation about what D&amp;D has learned or could learn from video games. You just had to stake your edition-war flag again.Thanks for proving my point for me. It's so very kind of you.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9579957, member: 6790260"] Sure, I'd certainly grant that it is more tactically bland than 3e. But "it's 3e but blander" would still seem to be an admission that it's more similar to 3e than anything else. For comparison, everything I've ever heard about mid- to high-level 2e combat is that it very quickly devolved into "do you have the spells to overcome your enemy's protections and thus obliterate them, or can they overcome your protections first?" type stuff, because high-level magic was stupidly OP back then. By comparison, 5e very intentionally took 3e magic and toned down the power of the upper end, while boosting the power of, and access to, the lower end. 3e and 5e are definitely the most "high magic" editions. And yes, that means I'm saying 4e [I]is not[/I] as high-magic, because...it isn't! There were rules for running a 4e game where magic was genuinely nonexistent, though you might have some struggles with certain kinds of things (e.g. large numbers of minions) unless you permitted some of the "kinda magical, kinda not" stuff (like the controller variant of Ranger, can't recall if that was the Hunter or the Scout). You just couldn't resist, could you? You just couldn't resist doing this yet again. You, specifically, were one of the people I thought of when I said it wasn't possible for us to have a conversation about what D&D has learned or could learn from video games. You just [I]had[/I] to stake your edition-war flag again. Thanks for proving my point for me. It's so very kind of you. [/QUOTE]

Verification