Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="teitan" data-source="post: 6132089" data-attributes="member: 3457">I agree with you. I think that WOTC is maybe making a bad decision in not revising 4e to not rely on miniatures. It's obvious they want to move away from that model, requiring minis or tokens to play and 4e could easily be modified to follow the model they want to support with a rules module to put that option back in since they are going that route anyway. Instead they are risking further fracturing their customer base creating yet another new system and taking steps backward in the design. 4e really pulled d&d into more modern design expectations, more so than 3e. Don't get me wrong, I loved 3e, it got me back in the game after the buy out killed my interest in d&d and rpgs in general. I miss my 3.5 books like the fat kid misses the cup cakes when they are all gone. I loved the rules because it was d&d with cohesion, even with how crazy it got in the complete & races of series of books and the rules bloat. One more book with umpteen feats & I was going to choke a witch.What 4e needed was more support for the other two pillars and less emphasis on minis with better adventure support. They could have based fifth on essentials builds to simplify classes. Revised the skill challenge system more & added the exploration rules. They could have tested the rules in a fourth edition supplement similar to how they tried 4e rules out in Star Wars Saga, tome of battle etc during the 3.5 says. I'm still amazed how many people loved Saga & spit on 4e. Mainly until essentials 4e to me felt incomplete and like they were always testing it, even the initial 3 books. They got a lot wrong and with essentials they fixed most of it.</blockquote>

Verification