Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Inquiry: How do 4E fans feel about 4E Essentials?
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="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8438687" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>My experience in play says differently. First of all, while you might choose, theoretically, to only use one stance, EVER, you still have to follow the stance rules, and beyond that you STILL HAVE THE CHOICE. 'chunking' means nothing to me. I want to make my decisions at the RELEVANT TIME, which I find to be always a simpler design. Instead of making several distinct choices, I'm choosing, with say my bow ranger, to do X and everything selected is related directly to my goal and comes temporally at the decision point for that goal. That's simple. I mean, we played these things, in the same party, and there's really no difference in complexity.</p><p></p><p>I don't think we needed to break the resource paradigm and build something so different, and thus filled with potential to generate awkward issues, as the Slayer and such to get that. I mean, we could discuss alternative implementations, I think you'll find that one probably wasn't the best choice.</p><p></p><p>Yeah, and that pretty much extends to the other classes that were built along similar lines, IMHO. They are not BAD, they are just not really adding enough to 4e to be worth a whole 10 SKUs worth of the product line, IMHO. And then half of every book from then on was a weird amalgam of options for old and new, it was a 'gift' that we just kept paying for, but had little clear benefit overall. </p><p></p><p>And that was my point, it was a suck of resources from what was interesting and unique about 4e and deserved further development. The GOOD PARTS of late era 4e are the supplements and the adventures, NOT Essentials! The sad fact is we could have gotten more of that goodness. Heck, why not a rewrite of DMG1 instead of RC? DMG1 is actually a pretty decent book, but it REALLY could have used some more polish. Without breaking the numerical 'engine' of the game we could have built a much more interesting game, so no compatibility issues, but much better. Instead we got E-classes, which is just meh.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 8438687, member: 82106"] My experience in play says differently. First of all, while you might choose, theoretically, to only use one stance, EVER, you still have to follow the stance rules, and beyond that you STILL HAVE THE CHOICE. 'chunking' means nothing to me. I want to make my decisions at the RELEVANT TIME, which I find to be always a simpler design. Instead of making several distinct choices, I'm choosing, with say my bow ranger, to do X and everything selected is related directly to my goal and comes temporally at the decision point for that goal. That's simple. I mean, we played these things, in the same party, and there's really no difference in complexity. I don't think we needed to break the resource paradigm and build something so different, and thus filled with potential to generate awkward issues, as the Slayer and such to get that. I mean, we could discuss alternative implementations, I think you'll find that one probably wasn't the best choice. Yeah, and that pretty much extends to the other classes that were built along similar lines, IMHO. They are not BAD, they are just not really adding enough to 4e to be worth a whole 10 SKUs worth of the product line, IMHO. And then half of every book from then on was a weird amalgam of options for old and new, it was a 'gift' that we just kept paying for, but had little clear benefit overall. And that was my point, it was a suck of resources from what was interesting and unique about 4e and deserved further development. The GOOD PARTS of late era 4e are the supplements and the adventures, NOT Essentials! The sad fact is we could have gotten more of that goodness. Heck, why not a rewrite of DMG1 instead of RC? DMG1 is actually a pretty decent book, but it REALLY could have used some more polish. Without breaking the numerical 'engine' of the game we could have built a much more interesting game, so no compatibility issues, but much better. Instead we got E-classes, which is just meh. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Inquiry: How do 4E fans feel about 4E Essentials?
Top