Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7049818" data-attributes="member: 996">Especially contrasted with 3e, yes.  It's really more a stylistic issue than anything.  Yes, 3e offered many more player options, and yes, 5e combat guidelines are perhaps tuned 'easy' as well as 'fast.'  But, mainly, it's the seismic shift of focus from player to DM, and while WotC promoted that throughout the development, launch and ongoing support of 5e, it was ultimately the community that went for it.  Under the 3.x RAW zeitgeist, it was up to the players to optimize their characters for survival and, beyond that, dominance - they drove the game, the DM tried to put up sufficiently tough challenges ahead of them, while still working within the same rules.  In 5e, the DM is back in the driver's seat, and tailoring challenges can go in either direction, and situations can be chosen to highlight each character.  As a DM you could have done that in 3e (I'm sure many did), but would have had to take liberties with the system that might have been alarming to players in that era, so even if a DM did run 3e something like we can happily run 5e, now, he probably did so with the tacit consent of his players ('player restraint' I've called, in the past).  And, 5e does present optional rules that can give players more choices at chargen/level-up, and the DM could always choose to document his rulings and stick with them, hammering out a more player-empowering foundation as they go, and making the 3e-era style work.  I think 5e could probably do with more such options, to continue to improve support for that style of play, too, even if I'm already not generally using feats or MCing when I DM, there are those who should be able to make excellent use of them.</blockquote>

Verification