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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8306496" data-attributes="member: 6704184">That is needed to match your preferences, sure. As much as I enjoy running and playing 4e, I find the gameplay much more enjoyable when run very loosely, and when I play an essentials class.  Bone stock, it’s fun but challenging due to just how much is codified, and the learning curve to get to a place where people improvise is much higher than it is with 5e.   Huh. As a DM, I love stuff like that. IME, most DMs have a pretty solid sense of what should work, and that if a legitimately good idea from the PCs makes the encounter less challenging, that is a feature, not a bug. PC cleverness and creativity should be a valid path to victory, otherwise why aren’t we just playing Neverwinter Online or DDO?IME 5e promotes an incredible amount of improvisation by telling DMs to employ a “yes, and” philosophy, and provide broadly applicable tools with multiple options, that don’t need to be referenced in play too much.   5e can be stripped of much player options, at the player’s discretion. I have characters I play who are mechanically complex, and characters who are dirt simple. I improvise with both, but it’s different when I’m playing my Rogue/Wizard Inventor/Alchemist/Ritualist/Magic item crafter, vs when I’m playing my halfling Swashbuckler with basically no mechanical widgets.   Some players are only happy with one or the other, or with something else. 5e let’s them all play together without much system conflict getting in the way.</blockquote>

Verification