Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8425431" data-attributes="member: 7032025">The fact is that it is not really the way I enjoy playing D&D, but when saddled with an edition that has this as a design intent and friends who enjoy it (as well as roleplaying, it's not incompatible, just, as you say, constrained), you play it, and still somewhat enjoy it.But I'm not judging, you will find people even on these forums who will explain that the constraining forces the creativity, that creativity is enhanced by constraints. My view is like yours, that it strangles it, at best it allows it but forcing it along very specific channels.These are the same people who want the same type of game out of 5e, and are really frustrated by the fuzzy rules supported by plain language instead of jargon, and the "DM's rulings over rules" concept.I honestly don't care, to each his own and all playstyles are valid if you enjoy them, it's just that some editions are much more suitable to certain playstyles.And coming back to this thread, this is why, with 5e combat not being designed for that type of game, it makes it harder to create a fool-proof encounter calculator. The monsters' powers are fuzzy, the situations and characters ability are fuzzy, the possibilities are much greater, the game is more open. For me, it makes it more suitable to a very open game, and less for one where encounters are calibrated as a technical challenge, that's all.</blockquote>