Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="overgeeked" data-source="post: 8581952" data-attributes="member: 86653">Which all kind of leads to an interesting question. What playstyle is 5E designed for? The early TSR versions and editions were all about the dungeoncrawl and wilderness exploration. XP for gold, not killing monsters. Low hit points. Combat was deadly. Death was laughably common. Resource management. So they pushed smart play, avoiding combat, interacting with the environment, etc. 2E shifted a bit to more story-focused play. The Player's Option series brought in builds and power gaming. Resource management was still a thing.3E embraced builds and power gaming and system mastery. It ended up in rocket-tag land. Numbers went up and healing was easier. Resource management was still a thing, after a fashion.4E was all about combat, almost to the complete exclusion of non-combat. Numbers went up and healing was easier. Resource management was practically gone as it only had two categories: encounter or daily. You got encounter resources back after a 5-minute rest and daily resources back after a 6-8 hour rest. And practically everything else was shoved into skill challenges. As much as I love skill challenges, they were not the panacea the designers thought they were.5E is often described as a throw-back to 2E. Numbers went up (though a few went down) and healing is easier. Death is rare. Resource management is all-but gone as most resources are trivial to replenish. So 5E isn't a dungeoncrawl game. It's not an overland travel game. It's not a resource management game. You only get XP for killing monsters per RAW. The game rewards killing monsters...but fights are trivially easy per RAW...unless the DM puts a heavy thumb on the scale...so it's not a combat game. It's smooth and easy to pick up and use, mostly. But it doesn't push a single playstyle...while actively discouraging or making certain playstyles impossible or pointless.</blockquote>

Verification