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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is D&D combat fun?
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="TheAlkaizer" data-source="post: 8407892" data-attributes="member: 7024893"><p>No, I'm saying the exact same thing. People are not walking in wanting to play RPGs, they walk in wanting to play D&D. The brand is bigger than the hobby itself. It's not the same as someone walking into a store and saying <em>"I want to start doing kayak"</em> and then being presented products.</p><p></p><p></p><p>It's subjective, of course. But sure.</p><p></p><p>I think the sidekicks rules they released in Tasha's are brilliant. They filled a void I had at my table, made things easier. The rules are quick, efficient and allow to do some fun little sidekicks.</p><p></p><p>I think the advantage system is absolutely brilliant. Going back to play a Paizo product with Starfinder, I realized how much I didn't miss stacking modifiers. The advantage system is ultimately a little too simple to my taste, but I much prefer that than the opposite. It's a brilliant design.</p><p></p><p>As opposed, I think encounter building is a mess. They had something really, really good and functional with 4E but they got rid of it. And 5E is, in my opinion, one of the worst encounter building experience I've had. Almost every element you're supposed to base yourself off to judge an encounter is precise. All the encounters I design are technically <em>deadly</em>, but they're just the right fit for my group (who are not optimisers in any way). I have to go over <em>deadly</em> to push them seriously.</p><p></p><p>This one might be more a bit more contentious. But I think the <em>action</em>, <em>bonus action</em> system is really bad. In its essence it's pretty simple. But it causes much more question and incomprehension from new players (in my experience, of course) than almost any part of the system. It works. But it could be much better I think. In a game where one of the most, if not the most impactful element of balance is the amount of actions that both sides have (action economy), it's a weird concept to have a bonus action that you can't really use, except in situations where you have an ability that calls for it. And it feels really bad not to use it because you can't? Like, you really ought to take something you can cast as a bonus action.</p><p></p><p>Just to be clear, I don't want to argue these. I know some people will disagree. We can start a new thread, this is not the thread for it. But yes, I think there are some parts of 5E which are a mess, or were just better in previous editions. 4E specifically had a ton of good elements they should have kept.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TheAlkaizer, post: 8407892, member: 7024893"] No, I'm saying the exact same thing. People are not walking in wanting to play RPGs, they walk in wanting to play D&D. The brand is bigger than the hobby itself. It's not the same as someone walking into a store and saying [I]"I want to start doing kayak"[/I] and then being presented products. It's subjective, of course. But sure. I think the sidekicks rules they released in Tasha's are brilliant. They filled a void I had at my table, made things easier. The rules are quick, efficient and allow to do some fun little sidekicks. I think the advantage system is absolutely brilliant. Going back to play a Paizo product with Starfinder, I realized how much I didn't miss stacking modifiers. The advantage system is ultimately a little too simple to my taste, but I much prefer that than the opposite. It's a brilliant design. As opposed, I think encounter building is a mess. They had something really, really good and functional with 4E but they got rid of it. And 5E is, in my opinion, one of the worst encounter building experience I've had. Almost every element you're supposed to base yourself off to judge an encounter is precise. All the encounters I design are technically [I]deadly[/I], but they're just the right fit for my group (who are not optimisers in any way). I have to go over [I]deadly[/I] to push them seriously. This one might be more a bit more contentious. But I think the [I]action[/I], [I]bonus action[/I] system is really bad. In its essence it's pretty simple. But it causes much more question and incomprehension from new players (in my experience, of course) than almost any part of the system. It works. But it could be much better I think. In a game where one of the most, if not the most impactful element of balance is the amount of actions that both sides have (action economy), it's a weird concept to have a bonus action that you can't really use, except in situations where you have an ability that calls for it. And it feels really bad not to use it because you can't? Like, you really ought to take something you can cast as a bonus action. Just to be clear, I don't want to argue these. I know some people will disagree. We can start a new thread, this is not the thread for it. But yes, I think there are some parts of 5E which are a mess, or were just better in previous editions. 4E specifically had a ton of good elements they should have kept. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is D&D combat fun?
Top