Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8364237" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think this is the same as what I posted upthread? Ie there's no big difference between 4e and 5e, except 4e does it by scaling DCs (above Easy) more steeply than default growth - so as you gain levels, you will need to focus to succeed on things that are more than Easy -  whereas 5e does it by having only focused people grow, so to be able to face stuff above Easy with some reasonable prospect of success you will have to focus.I think there are some points of difference, eg Hard DCs at lower levels. Most 4e PCs at 1st level will have one skill which has a reasonable chance against these (+3 or +4 stat, +5 proficiency, maybe +2 from some other build feature) whereas in 5e few 1st level PCs will have a skill that is reasonable against these (+3 stat, +2 prof - even another +2 from Expertise doesn't make the bonus as big as the 4e one). This matters to 4e play - because 1st level PCs will encounter Hard DCs if a GM is following the default framework for skill challenges - but I don't know if it matters in 5e. I get the impression that it does come up a bit (maybe against Medium rather than Hard) because I read posts which assert that dice rolls swamp character ability - which looks like a claim that is most credible if we're looking at bonuses of +0 to +5 vs DC 15. That doesn't tend to be a thing in 4e, because the skill gap between focused and unfocused at 1st level tends to be wider. But my understanding is that this is supposed to be a feature of 5e, making it a bit more "rollicking" and forgiving of build differences. (I initially thought about expressing this as favouring play over build but it only does that in the sense that hoping to roll well on a d20 is part of play; hence why I went for "rollicking" instead.)One feature of 4e is that - at least as I experienced it - it has fewer Bardic Inspiration/Bless/Guidance-style buffs (which obviously change the 5e maths a bit in practice) but (at least if played in the spirit suggested in the DMG's discussion of skill challenges and further developed in the DMG2) features more "improvised"/creative deployments of powers to get ad hoc augmentation (the default currency is +2 to a bonus for one encounter power or one healing surge; the uniform build structure is what allows a default currency to be established; how this translates into fictional positioning and mechanics-fiction interplay is a whole other thing which has been the focus of many a 4e flame war!).I'm not able to say exactly how these differences affect feel in play, but I think they must have some effect.Another difference that is relevant pertains to your purple worm maths example. 4e PCs, at least once they're at the level of fighting a purple worm, are more likely to have abilities that don't necessarily buff a relevant defence but may permit escaping or evading or negating the worm's attack in other ways - this is the whole interrupt/off-turn action aspect of 4e that is frequently discussed. (I know that 5e has the Shield spell, but to the best of my knowledge 4e has more, and more varied, sort of stuff performing that sort of function.)Again, without knowing exactly how I think this would have some effect on play. For lack of a better word, I think it pushes 4e in the direction of more intricate play.</blockquote>

Verification