Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 9444041" data-attributes="member: 22779">I agree with what you are saying here and phrase it slightly differently:&nbsp; I want to be able to trust the mechanics so I can just get on with the game.&nbsp; It's the primary reason I left 2e for 3e - being able to trust the mechanics (the Frisky Chest example above is just the tiniest tip of a HUGE ice burg of nonsensical, contradictory and outright baffling mechanics that make up AD&amp;D 1e and 2e).&nbsp; And, frankly, the biggest issues with 3e come from poorly worded or vague mechanics - how many versions of Polymorph were there?&nbsp; Now, I do think 4e went too far.&nbsp; But, my bigger issue with 4e was the proliferation of fiddly bit mechanics that made play such a slog - constantly being interrupted by this or that power and the analysis paralysis of players combined with players who were... less than diligent about reading what their characters could actually do.5e is a big improvement on D&amp;D, IMO.&nbsp; But, one area where I think 5e could be better is cleaning up these legacy elements (and, if you look at most of these open ended effects, nearly all of them are legacy mechanics brought forward for the whole nostalgia trip that powered the early days of 5e) by tightening them up.&nbsp; Not choking them off.&nbsp; No one is calling for a Command spell that has one single result and nothing else.&nbsp; No one wants the 4e version of Command back.&nbsp; At least, I've never seen anyone claim to want that.But I think that the 2024 version nicely splits the difference here.&nbsp; It makes the overhead on the DM less which, to me, should always be a goal of any mechanic.&nbsp; Within reason.&nbsp; Because I know, as soon as I post this, people will be quoting that and claiming that I hate creativity.&nbsp; To me, the 2024 version really is the compromise.&nbsp; We could go back to the 4e version where the effect is identical no matter how its used - target is dazed and can be slid 3 squares or knocked prone.&nbsp; Does anyone want that?&nbsp; I don't.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 9444041, member: 22779"] I agree with what you are saying here and phrase it slightly differently: I want to be able to trust the mechanics so I can just get on with the game. It's the primary reason I left 2e for 3e - being able to trust the mechanics (the Frisky Chest example above is just the tiniest tip of a HUGE ice burg of nonsensical, contradictory and outright baffling mechanics that make up AD&D 1e and 2e). And, frankly, the biggest issues with 3e come from poorly worded or vague mechanics - how many versions of Polymorph were there? Now, I do think 4e went too far. But, my bigger issue with 4e was the proliferation of fiddly bit mechanics that made play such a slog - constantly being interrupted by this or that power and the analysis paralysis of players combined with players who were... less than diligent about reading what their characters could actually do. 5e is a big improvement on D&D, IMO. But, one area where I think 5e could be better is cleaning up these legacy elements (and, if you look at most of these open ended effects, nearly all of them are legacy mechanics brought forward for the whole nostalgia trip that powered the early days of 5e) by tightening them up. Not choking them off. No one is calling for a Command spell that has one single result and nothing else. No one wants the 4e version of Command back. At least, I've never seen anyone claim to want that. But I think that the 2024 version nicely splits the difference here. It makes the overhead on the DM less which, to me, should always be a goal of any mechanic. Within reason. Because I know, as soon as I post this, people will be quoting that and claiming that I hate creativity. To me, the 2024 version really is the compromise. We could go back to the 4e version where the effect is identical no matter how its used - target is dazed and can be slid 3 squares or knocked prone. Does anyone want that? I don't. [/QUOTE]

Verification