Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8582432" data-attributes="member: 16814">The overshadowing is another of those misrepresentations that went with the edition war.&nbsp;&nbsp; This claim was made by people trying to categorize the game in a specific way. And almost always paired with misrepresentations of the non combat pieces,&nbsp; claiming obviously wrong things and trying to sweep them aside.&nbsp;&nbsp; 4e entirely supported entire non combat sessions of play with robust mechanics and direction on how to do it and award experience for it.&nbsp;&nbsp; No other edition of D&amp;D has had such clear and direct guidelines for non combat play. Better is subjective.&nbsp;&nbsp; That there's much less to track in 5e isn't subjective, and both systems drive to resolution of combat well.&nbsp;&nbsp; Fewer pieces,&nbsp; same resolution,&nbsp; and that's why I said 5e is more efficient in combat.&nbsp;&nbsp; Better didn't come into it. 5e is only faster than some,&nbsp; and those are games that intentionally design for more detailed combat.&nbsp;&nbsp; There's huge numbers of systems that make 5e look glacial in combat resolution.&nbsp;&nbsp; I have no idea what you're saying is purely implementation -- your antecedent to it is unclear.&nbsp;&nbsp; 5e isn't very generic at all,&nbsp; especially on combat,&nbsp; I'm not at all clear on your line of training here. I like 5e, mind, and choose to spend some of my limited time playing it.&nbsp;&nbsp; I'm not claiming it's bad.&nbsp;&nbsp; Far from it.&nbsp;&nbsp; But I don't at all consider 5e to be generic. The detail of a combat engine has zero bearing on roleplaying,&nbsp; unless you mean something idiosyncratic by that.&nbsp;&nbsp; And if so,&nbsp; then it would stand to reason that an even smaller combat engine would do better for roleplaying than 5e?&nbsp; Is that the claim?Ok.&nbsp; Um.&nbsp; You can make up monsters too play 5e isn't a ringing endorsement for being generic.&nbsp; It should be expected that you can make up threats for any RPG!&nbsp; The exploration bit is off as well,&nbsp; because it's not really establishing what generic here.At that point,&nbsp; you're not even using the mechanics in the game!&nbsp; So weird to say that abandoning the rules of the game is a strength of the game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8582432, member: 16814"] The overshadowing is another of those misrepresentations that went with the edition war. This claim was made by people trying to categorize the game in a specific way. And almost always paired with misrepresentations of the non combat pieces, claiming obviously wrong things and trying to sweep them aside. 4e entirely supported entire non combat sessions of play with robust mechanics and direction on how to do it and award experience for it. No other edition of D&D has had such clear and direct guidelines for non combat play. Better is subjective. That there's much less to track in 5e isn't subjective, and both systems drive to resolution of combat well. Fewer pieces, same resolution, and that's why I said 5e is more efficient in combat. Better didn't come into it. 5e is only faster than some, and those are games that intentionally design for more detailed combat. There's huge numbers of systems that make 5e look glacial in combat resolution. I have no idea what you're saying is purely implementation -- your antecedent to it is unclear. 5e isn't very generic at all, especially on combat, I'm not at all clear on your line of training here. I like 5e, mind, and choose to spend some of my limited time playing it. I'm not claiming it's bad. Far from it. But I don't at all consider 5e to be generic. The detail of a combat engine has zero bearing on roleplaying, unless you mean something idiosyncratic by that. And if so, then it would stand to reason that an even smaller combat engine would do better for roleplaying than 5e? Is that the claim? Ok. Um. You can make up monsters too play 5e isn't a ringing endorsement for being generic. It should be expected that you can make up threats for any RPG! The exploration bit is off as well, because it's not really establishing what generic here. At that point, you're not even using the mechanics in the game! So weird to say that abandoning the rules of the game is a strength of the game. [/QUOTE]

Verification