Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="slobo777" data-source="post: 5958627" data-attributes="member: 6694877">I've been playing mostly 4E for ~3 years, with occasional (and enjoyable) sessions of 3.5E thrown in. I am somewhat disappointed from what I have seen of 5E next, but am not feeling let down, just a but *meh* until I've seen some more.I think the OP's comments on balance are spot on. If the game expands into more non-combat, then I also want the non-combat to be balanced in the same ways, I don't want solutions to in-game problems to resolve as requiring the casting of specific high-level spells, i.e. mini-games just for the wizard and cleric players to play. I don't want players to have &quot;sidekick&quot; PCs, and I expect the rules to support that, not have to lean on player and DM creativity to work around the issue. So far I have not seen *anything* in 5E to make me think class/class balance is high on the agenda. The spell lists are same-old, same-old from earlier editions, and it's the availability and power of the high level spells from these editions that breaks equality between classes.On &quot;ease of play&quot; I'd have to disagree with the OP about 4E. The sheer number of options giving conditional +/-1 or 2 on a typical PC sheet, with conditions varying hugely, plus usually around 20 limited-use power cards to play, doesn't make for easy play. However, provided we've had our caffeine it does make for fun, dynamic play - just not fast.I do wonder if a lot of 4E fans' worry on 5E (I include myself here, and maybe only myself) is due to the expectation that the next D&amp;D was going to be more of a continuation of 4, with rules simplified for faster combat, and other core issues in 4 &quot;fixed&quot;. What we've got instead is something radically different, and some of the things I feel are progressive about 4E, and would like to see taken further, are instead regressing to the mean. That doesn't make 5E a bad game or bad design, just that I had switched to a different way of thinking about D&amp;D, and not yet prepared to switch back just because of some new published material.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="slobo777, post: 5958627, member: 6694877"] I've been playing mostly 4E for ~3 years, with occasional (and enjoyable) sessions of 3.5E thrown in. I am somewhat disappointed from what I have seen of 5E next, but am not feeling let down, just a but *meh* until I've seen some more. I think the OP's comments on balance are spot on. If the game expands into more non-combat, then I also want the non-combat to be balanced in the same ways, I don't want solutions to in-game problems to resolve as requiring the casting of specific high-level spells, i.e. mini-games just for the wizard and cleric players to play. I don't want players to have "sidekick" PCs, and I expect the rules to support that, not have to lean on player and DM creativity to work around the issue. So far I have not seen *anything* in 5E to make me think class/class balance is high on the agenda. The spell lists are same-old, same-old from earlier editions, and it's the availability and power of the high level spells from these editions that breaks equality between classes. On "ease of play" I'd have to disagree with the OP about 4E. The sheer number of options giving conditional +/-1 or 2 on a typical PC sheet, with conditions varying hugely, plus usually around 20 limited-use power cards to play, doesn't make for easy play. However, provided we've had our caffeine it does make for fun, dynamic play - just not fast. I do wonder if a lot of 4E fans' worry on 5E (I include myself here, and maybe only myself) is due to the expectation that the next D&D was going to be more of a continuation of 4, with rules simplified for faster combat, and other core issues in 4 "fixed". What we've got instead is something radically different, and some of the things I feel are progressive about 4E, and would like to see taken further, are instead regressing to the mean. That doesn't make 5E a bad game or bad design, just that I had switched to a different way of thinking about D&D, and not yet prepared to switch back just because of some new published material. [/QUOTE]

Verification