Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Flipping the Table: Did Removing Miniatures Save D&D?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jay Verkuilen" data-source="post: 7749210" data-attributes="member: 6873517"><p>D&D sure doesn't get into innovations. Storyteller had the extended action, which I recall relying on a lot. It's not a massive conceptual leap towards allowing some degree of teamwork for that. As elaborate as SCs? No, I'd agree, not really, but IMO one of SCs' very problems was how elaborate they were. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>True, although I think some of that was happening in 3.X already. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Interesting. Not what I would have expected. Your point about 4E being more open to alternative parties is interesting as well. That doesn't jive with what I recall from when I played it, but different tables behave different ways and the DM can often adapt. The times I saw a non-combined arms party seemed to involve people loading up on strikers and they had problems. </p><p></p><p>Still, one of my favorite games I ever played in was 2E where the party was a thief, fighter, paladin, and custom bard class (based on the Bard's Tale bard). The DM in that campaign was very, very good, though. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, the things I'm mentioning could be examples of good things, but turn length could get to be a problem. It happened in every 4E game I played in, particularly for characters built around either off-turn actions (e.g., the original 4E bard) or turning minor actions into an attack (e.g., the barbarian or avenger). It was a HUGE issue for some players, who seemed to suffer from choice paralysis, math issues, or both. 3.X really hit with math issues, especially at the medium to high levels. </p><p></p><p>When I ran 4E I kept it down but only by being quite draconian about turn length and highly encouraging Essentials characters. I really didn't enjoy running 4E, though partly that might have had to do with the fact that I was having some fairly serious health issues at the time which often involved a good bit of "mind fog", something that is very hard to describe unless you've experienced it. </p><p></p><p>Still, as I said in this thread to pemerton, one thing that really didn't occur to me now was how gamist with a side of narrativist 4E was; I derive a good deal of what I find enjoyable for DMing from feeling like there's a consistent and logical world, which was something 4E really didn't emphasize at all. It also seemed to bring out the rules lawyers in many players I knew. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, we allowed MC'd humans. Actually we played with fairly different MC rules, much more based on the way BECM treated the elf. Probably best I hadn't even raised this. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/worried.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":-S" title="Uhm :-S" data-shortname=":-S" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>4E was pretty clearly a case of the teacher learning from the student. It has lots of influence of MMOs, MtG, and fantasy minis games, all of which were pretty clearly influenced by D&D in various ways. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, that's true, and it's something I think is missing, though in combat healing is much rarer in 5E in general. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not saying the bard should suck, I just don't like that they're forced to be primary casters. Both Rangers and Paladins are half casters, though I'd be happier if they were less so. They are both divine casters, and there isn't a half caster arcane character. I'd really have liked the bard to be able to do things like activate healing surges and have other interesting class feature (but not spells!) buffs, with spellcasting being more of a sideline for them. An artificer as a half caster arcane character would be pretty cool. In fact I think they might have been able to make one class and have those two be archetypes, though maybe that's too much of a stretch.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jay Verkuilen, post: 7749210, member: 6873517"] D&D sure doesn't get into innovations. Storyteller had the extended action, which I recall relying on a lot. It's not a massive conceptual leap towards allowing some degree of teamwork for that. As elaborate as SCs? No, I'd agree, not really, but IMO one of SCs' very problems was how elaborate they were. True, although I think some of that was happening in 3.X already. Interesting. Not what I would have expected. Your point about 4E being more open to alternative parties is interesting as well. That doesn't jive with what I recall from when I played it, but different tables behave different ways and the DM can often adapt. The times I saw a non-combined arms party seemed to involve people loading up on strikers and they had problems. Still, one of my favorite games I ever played in was 2E where the party was a thief, fighter, paladin, and custom bard class (based on the Bard's Tale bard). The DM in that campaign was very, very good, though. Yes, the things I'm mentioning could be examples of good things, but turn length could get to be a problem. It happened in every 4E game I played in, particularly for characters built around either off-turn actions (e.g., the original 4E bard) or turning minor actions into an attack (e.g., the barbarian or avenger). It was a HUGE issue for some players, who seemed to suffer from choice paralysis, math issues, or both. 3.X really hit with math issues, especially at the medium to high levels. When I ran 4E I kept it down but only by being quite draconian about turn length and highly encouraging Essentials characters. I really didn't enjoy running 4E, though partly that might have had to do with the fact that I was having some fairly serious health issues at the time which often involved a good bit of "mind fog", something that is very hard to describe unless you've experienced it. Still, as I said in this thread to pemerton, one thing that really didn't occur to me now was how gamist with a side of narrativist 4E was; I derive a good deal of what I find enjoyable for DMing from feeling like there's a consistent and logical world, which was something 4E really didn't emphasize at all. It also seemed to bring out the rules lawyers in many players I knew. Yes, we allowed MC'd humans. Actually we played with fairly different MC rules, much more based on the way BECM treated the elf. Probably best I hadn't even raised this. :-S 4E was pretty clearly a case of the teacher learning from the student. It has lots of influence of MMOs, MtG, and fantasy minis games, all of which were pretty clearly influenced by D&D in various ways. Yes, that's true, and it's something I think is missing, though in combat healing is much rarer in 5E in general. I'm not saying the bard should suck, I just don't like that they're forced to be primary casters. Both Rangers and Paladins are half casters, though I'd be happier if they were less so. They are both divine casters, and there isn't a half caster arcane character. I'd really have liked the bard to be able to do things like activate healing surges and have other interesting class feature (but not spells!) buffs, with spellcasting being more of a sideline for them. An artificer as a half caster arcane character would be pretty cool. In fact I think they might have been able to make one class and have those two be archetypes, though maybe that's too much of a stretch. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Flipping the Table: Did Removing Miniatures Save D&D?
Top