D&D 5E Does anyone else run 5th Edition from a 4th edition perspective?

[Moon_Goddess]

Unfortunately no. I play a 4e campaign by the book (+ multiple erratas!) and a 5e campaign by the book. I like both, but I think my ideal game is lurking somewhere between the two with 4e being way too much (in every possible respect) and 5e being to little in some really key respects.

I really want a midpoint game... but sadly I feel like I'm stuck in a place no one else will help me. I'm the total opposite of you, I feel like 4e was slightly too much, and 5e is WAY WAY too little. And since no one I know will play 4e with me, sorry to be pessimistic and all but I feel trapped.

 

[Valetudo]

I dont really think I played 4th from a 4th edition perspective. Dnd no matter what edition has really changed that.

 

[Raith5]

I really want a midpoint game... but sadly I feel like I'm stuck in a place no one else will help me. I'm the total opposite of you, I feel like 4e was slightly too much, and 5e is WAY WAY too little. And since no one I know will play 4e with me, sorry to be pessimistic and all but I feel trapped.

I sympathize. I dont think we are opposites. Overall I would prefer to play 4e, I think it is a better game than 5e, but I do currently enjoy more rules light nature of 5th ed. But overall I think 4e had a much more interesting take on martial characters, more interesting monsters, more interesting combats, a more logical system of static defenses where the attacker rolls, etc.

 

[Alexemplar]

I dont really think I played 4th from a 4th edition perspective. Dnd no matter what edition has really changed that.

I had some issues with players who felt this way about my DM'ing in 4e. I've always been big on a lot of the stuff 4e popularized and its overall philosophy. Heck, I even used the minion concept (adapted from Heavy Gear's mook option for NPCs) years before 5e was even announced.

Except for when it came to the more codified/rules heavy combat system. I would often get players who loved the in depth tactical aspects of 4e combat and were dismayed when my battles didn't really reward attention to precise positioning or the fact that I would often have opponents reeling, falling down, or suffering effects for narrative reasons as well as a result of their attacks'/abilities' rules.

 

[Tallifer]

One thing however which I ditched when running 4E, and continue to disregard in 5E, is any grid. Nothing worse than players wasting time every turn counting squares and dithering over where best to move or target.

"Am I close enough?" "Not quite" or "Sure."
"can I catch more than one enemy with my spell?" "They are too far apart." or "Sure. Fry them all."

I do use a visual aid, but not a map. Such as a picture of the scene:

 

[Moon_Goddess]

"Am I close enough?" "Not quite" or "Sure."
"can I catch more than one enemy with my spell?" "They are too far apart." or "Sure. Fry them all."

I do love the visual aid, I might be able to stand you game with it, but I've honestly gotten to the point if a game is going to be "theater of the mind" I'm just going to walk out. I need to know what I can do, not guess and have to ask the DM if I can hit more than one.

 

[Tallifer]

I do love the visual aid, I might be able to stand you game with it, but I've honestly gotten to the point if a game is going to be "theater of the mind" I'm just going to walk out. I need to know what I can do, not guess and have to ask the DM if I can hit more than one.

I hear you loud and clear. We usually play (face to face) with a beam projector and the image on a classroom whiteboard or on Google+ with the image on Twiddla, so I and the players can doodle our positions on the picture. Therefore, it is not quite so "theatre of the mind" as you fear. Everyone can usually estimate at a glance what they can do.