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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="UngeheuerLich" data-source="post: 6780827" data-attributes="member: 59057">I say: yes, in some places we need it. 4e, as much good ideas there were, and many retained in 5e, did not work out in the long run... If the rules text is written in code words, and every power, no matter how similar they may be, has its own text, all you remember and speak about in a game session is fiddly bits. Now I know how a fireball works, and if a creature casts it, I know exactly what to expect. In 4e even swallow whole was different for each creature. Another thing is reflavouring. In 4e people used it to let a goblin look like a kobold and players could never guess from the look, how dangerous something is. In 5e we also have reskinning, but if I use the scout, I add flavour by adding racial traits (which could be done in 4e too, btw). If a creature is a solo (legendary) creature, I can guess by the look of it. I really believe, the designers of 4e had similar goals in their mind as 5e people, but when more and more people designed for 4e, we got solo goblins and such creatures, and in the end, everything in the world was just a texture over a mechanical balanced world. Choices and advancement of players were nihilated by the world growing with them.I do still believe 4e was a good edition for a while and I do believe, if  "essentials" came first we would still have it around. But this was too little, too late, and noone left (except me) who could be pleased with that.</blockquote>

Verification