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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8395730" data-attributes="member: 7032025">Yes, they are, it's obvious. Just as I've been trying to play AD&D 1 e in 2e (what a mess), in 3e (OK up to lvl 10 or so, after that we had to take measures), in 4e (did not work at all), and in 5e (works like a charm).Exactly how offensive is that factual statement ? 3e was built for min-maxing, and 5e inherits a number of words from it, but is based on completely different principles (natural language, bounded accuracy, DM empowerement, rulings more than rules, and the latter much much simpler, TotM as the basic way of playing, etc.) and the devs themselves have drawn its ancestry not to 3e but to the original D&D editions. It's just a fact.And I'm doing it, I've been doing in forever, how is that a criticism of others' way of playing ?I think you have my position wrong, I'm not saying that minmaxing in 5e requires loose readings, I'm saying that it requires extremely strict and orientated readings of rules which have on purpose been written loosely in natural language.The fact that some minmaxing can be done on barely a few combos is unfortunate, but it goes to show that, contrary to 3e where there was an explosion of builds in all directions, it's very much limited in 5e, and honestly some less strict reading of the rules and simple rulings really limits the power gap that you can obtain.Overall, the power gap between optimised and casual is way, way lower in 5e than in 3e, which in turns helps limit the problem, especially if you consider that feats, multiclass, and Variant Human (and even more Floating ASIs) are OPTIONS, and therefore can be controlled by a DM who is conscious of the power gaps potential effects and want to limit it.You're sort of right about this, I did not write it clearly. What I meant is that 4e was a very, very technical game, in a sense even more than 3e, and they limited the powergaming through the denial of the openness of D&D in general. It was a different approach, it stayed technical but acted on another cursor, and I agree that in 4e the power gap was very manageable. Still, there were <a href="https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/158433/what-tier-are-the-dd-4e-classes" target="_blank">tiers </a>of classes, see here for example.As mentioned above, the simple combination of having even in the core books so much customisation for characters, between point-buy, feats, multiclassing (and level dipping), prestige classes, etc. meant it was already an optimiser's dream come true. And of course the power drift in the further books enhanced that even more.However, 5e is certainly not going the same way. First, as mentioned above, the game design is fundamentally different. As a DM, I have all the tools I need to shut down ruleslawyers and powergamers instantly if I want to.Moreover, consider:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">3e, dead in 3 years due to badly written concepts over exploited so quickly (attributes buff spells in particular).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">3.5, dead in 4 years due to uncontrollable bloat</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">4e, dead in 3 years due to the necessity to limit options</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">4e essentials, dead in 2-4 years due to lack of openness of the world and system</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">5e, still alive and kicking with so limited power bloat that powergamers complain all the time about the lack of crunchiness of every single book, after SEVEN YEARS.</li> </ul>The designers are conscious of that, and I know that people still think JC is an idiot for his sometimes contradictory and fluffy rulings on tweeter, but the guy (and the whole staff) are doing this absolutely on purpose, because they don't want to give tools to powergamers to abuse in their builds, they just want to give all DMs ideas about potential rulings (again, rulings, not rules).And no, the pace has not increased, in terms of the more "crunchy" books, Xanathar was Y+3, Tasha Y+6, and as far as I know there is none other in the works. Again, the designers are aware of all that, and controlling it masterfully.I agree, my main problem is that it stayed very technical and that it limited the openness of the world.</blockquote>

Verification