D&D 4E Disguising 4e as 5e/5.5e

[Teemu]

I wouldn’t try disguising any game as another. Just be upfront with the players and explain what you’d like to play. Maybe they’ll agree to try a short game using 4e?

I’ll also agree with some others that PF2 doesn’t really play much like 4e at all. The similarities are very superficial. Honestly 5e feels more like 4e: simple short rests, short rest abilities, legendary/solo creature similarities, action economy. Sure, there are plenty of differences but I’m mainly making the comparison between 5e/PF2 and 4e. 4e is still largely its own beast and no other major RPG quite captures its idiosyncrasies.

 

[Tigris]

From your perspective... being someone who doesn't like 4e... this might make sense to recommend. For someone who likes 4e, moving to something more "tolerable" isn't exactly a selling point.

I thought exactly the same. Why would you come into a 4E thread when you cant stand 4E, just to tell people to play something different?

It is when the OP is trying to hamfist 4E into 5E to please a group. Lots of folks that like 4E also enjoy PF2.

I am not so sure here. It is something which PF2 people often say, but a lot of people saying that they also enjoyed 4E dont really show knowledge about 4E. It often sounds more like an excuse to say that PF2 is better. "Ah sure I also played 4E and liked it but PF2 is better."

 

[payn]

I am not so sure here. It is something which PF2 people often say, but a lot of people saying that they also enjoyed 4E dont really show knowledge about 4E. It often sounds more like an excuse to say that PF2 is better. "Ah sure I also played 4E and liked it but PF2 is better."

Well, that is just my opinion. I do have have friends that love 4E and like that PF2 has some similarities to it. The only reason i commented is my mind went instantly to PF2 when I read the OP.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

while i'd agree with everyone else that you shouldn't try to trick your players like this, i actually do know a guy whose DM tricked him in exactly this way.

i was discussing 5e in a discord and this guy came in saying the game was incredibly easy and he felt unkillable. okay, that fit with what we were talking about, so nobody raised an eyebrow. then he specified that he took on 3 adult red dragons by himself at level 10, and THAT'S where we got confused. we figured out he was actually playing 4e when he recognized the NADs, and he said he thought they were playing 5e because his DM had the 5e monster manual at the table.

it TURNS OUT that the dm was running 4e with FIFTH EDITION MONSTERS. which, uh...definitely explains how the guy took on 3 dragons by himself.

 

[Tigris]

while i'd agree with everyone else that you shouldn't try to trick your players like this, i actually do know a guy whose DM tricked him in exactly this way.

i was discussing 5e in a discord and this guy came in saying the game was incredibly easy and he felt unkillable. okay, that fit with what we were talking about, so nobody raised an eyebrow. then he specified that he took on 3 adult red dragons by himself at level 10, and THAT'S where we got confused. we figured out he was actually playing 4e when he recognized the NADs, and he said he thought they were playing 5e because his DM had the 5e monster manual at the table.

it TURNS OUT that the dm was running 4e with FIFTH EDITION MONSTERS. which, uh...definitely explains how the guy took on 3 dragons by himself.

Of course usin 5E monsters with 4E is not a good idea, but the trick with the 5E covers might be. So OP could just use some 5E covers on 4E books on the table. (Maybe some 3rd party book covers to make it less obvious). I mean it worked with your example, it might work with other players as well.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Of course usin 5E monsters with 4E is not a good idea, but the trick with the 5E covers might be. So OP could just use some 5E covers on 4E books on the table. (Maybe some 3rd party book covers to make it less obvious). I mean it worked with your example, it might work with other players as well.

i mean, again, i'd still say trying to trick your players about the system you're running is a bad idea - not because it can't work, but because if they ever find out it'll harm their trust in you.

it's also kind of just a jerk move in general, honestly.

 

[Kannik]

Always surprised to hear this. PF2 is so completely different I see absolutely none of PF1 in it which is why I have trouble wanting to play it. Its not entirely like 4E, which is why I can tolerate it, but its for sure nothing like PF1.

To clarify, for me it feels closer to (not the same/identical, but more akin to the feel of) 3.Xe than it does to the feel and experience 4e. As in, if I were to map the feel/experience of PF2e compared to the my feel/experience of 3.X and 4e, it would be like this:

3.X -- PF2 ------ 4e

(Also I've not actually played PF1, so I ought to have instead noted 3.Xe in my previous post rather than making an assumption based on the sharing of my friends who have played/play PF1.)

 

[payn]

To clarify, for me it feels closer to (not the same/identical, but more akin to the feel of) 3.Xe than it does to the feel and experience 4e. As in, if I were to map the feel/experience of PF2e compared to the my feel/experience of 3.X and 4e, it would be like this:

3.X -- PF2 ------ 4e

(Also I've not actually played PF1, so I ought to have instead noted 3.Xe in my previous post rather than making an assumption based on the sharing of my friends who have played/play PF1.)

Right on. Thats kind of what went through my mind. That PF2 would be a compromise for the OP and their players. Less mechanical rework for the GM, and a straight up system for the players.

Apologies for the derail.

 

[Micah Sweet]

New shiny and he's played BGIII. His son DMs 5e as well so he's happy enough with it.

I'm forever DM and not happy running 5e, I find it dreary. 4e would be my crunchy DND of choice and B/X my streamlined pick.

There is no good reason to run a game you don't like. Your players will pick up on it anyway. Just tell them you don't want to run 5e.

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

There is no good reason to run a game you don't like. Your players will pick up on it anyway. Just tell them you don't want to run 5e.

100%. I believe it's also good to look at the table dynamic and why everyone's getting together.

Some tables are there strictly for the game, and only this One System. Some don't care what, if anything, is being run as long as they are hanging out - they'd hang out even if it was board game night. Some/most are a mix.