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
Legends & Lore - A Retrospective
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="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 6523333" data-attributes="member: 18"><p>I'm not disagreeing, per se, but how do you reckon this? Looking at 3E<em> at the same time after release</em>, it seemed way less divisive, with virtually everyone I knew (online and off) seeing it as significant improvement over 2E, and tons of people coming back to D&D for it. People sticking with D&D/1E/2E were far and few between and virtually no-one was even considering D&D-esque games.</p><p></p><p>Whereas say, a year or three after 3.5E, we were seeing significant dissatisfaction, people heading off to other d20 and non-d20 RPGs, and the very beginnings of mainstream retro-clones, and so on. But where will 5E be in four-five-six years? Hard to say.</p><p></p><p>Even comparing 5E to the latter, I'm not sure it's brought a lot of people back into the fold - I still see a lot of people playing retro-clones and alternative D&Ds like Pathfinder or Dungeon World. 4E was certainly more divisive than 5E, though.</p><p></p><p>So I'm not really seeing "least divisive". I can see "managed to heal some cracks and certainly avoided exacerbating most of them". But I feel like 3E brought people together way more, even if it later blew them apart.</p><p></p><p>EDIT:</p><p></p><p>This is an interesting passage:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think you're looking at this the way people who play games, do, though. I don't know of any D&D players, from any edition, who actively look for miniature-based play from D&D, who actively look for a grid/hexes, as a goal in themselves.</p><p></p><p>I mean, I'm a huge fan of 4E's tactical play, but I'm a fan of the tactical play, not specifically a fan of grids, or minis, or whatever (indeed I hate minis outside of actual boardgames - we use tokens). Do you understand the difference? It's a pretty huge difference. I've never come across a 4E group who were play "because minis" or "because grid" (or "because grid+minis" or whatever). Nor a 3.XE group, for that matter. I know of people who WON'T play a game because it requires minis, but that's a different story.</p><p></p><p>So I think when you flippantly dismiss 4E-style tactical play, and claim 5E has "something for everyone" because it has rules for mini + grid, I think you're not understanding what people actually want. I think it's a failure of understanding that the leads of the 5E team, particularly Mike Mearls have suffered from, too, so I don't think you're crazy to make it, but it is a failure nonetheless. Even 3.XE/PF fans who like tactical combat stuff will find distinctly less in 5E than 4E.</p><p></p><p>Basically, 5E did a good job of providing something for perhaps<em> most </em>D&D groups (given plenty of people played 4E but didn't really get into the tactical combat and so on), but definitely not for everyone by a long stretch. And a large part of the reason why is the faulty logic we see here, which presumes we want minis/grids for minis/grids sake, not minis/grid for tactics sake.</p><p></p><p>We'd see more of this strange (to me) thinking with the whole "Tactics means facing rules right guys!?" deal later.</p><p></p><p>2nd Edit - I think the big "Mission Accomplished" (ahem) from this column is providing really strong support for TotM, as that was something that had been on the decline since 3E (indeed, I remember writing rants about how 3E was "forcing" me to use minis/grid back when it had been released!). For the first time, a WotC edition unquestionably supported TotM.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 6523333, member: 18"] I'm not disagreeing, per se, but how do you reckon this? Looking at 3E[I] at the same time after release[/I], it seemed way less divisive, with virtually everyone I knew (online and off) seeing it as significant improvement over 2E, and tons of people coming back to D&D for it. People sticking with D&D/1E/2E were far and few between and virtually no-one was even considering D&D-esque games. Whereas say, a year or three after 3.5E, we were seeing significant dissatisfaction, people heading off to other d20 and non-d20 RPGs, and the very beginnings of mainstream retro-clones, and so on. But where will 5E be in four-five-six years? Hard to say. Even comparing 5E to the latter, I'm not sure it's brought a lot of people back into the fold - I still see a lot of people playing retro-clones and alternative D&Ds like Pathfinder or Dungeon World. 4E was certainly more divisive than 5E, though. So I'm not really seeing "least divisive". I can see "managed to heal some cracks and certainly avoided exacerbating most of them". But I feel like 3E brought people together way more, even if it later blew them apart. EDIT: This is an interesting passage: I don't think you're looking at this the way people who play games, do, though. I don't know of any D&D players, from any edition, who actively look for miniature-based play from D&D, who actively look for a grid/hexes, as a goal in themselves. I mean, I'm a huge fan of 4E's tactical play, but I'm a fan of the tactical play, not specifically a fan of grids, or minis, or whatever (indeed I hate minis outside of actual boardgames - we use tokens). Do you understand the difference? It's a pretty huge difference. I've never come across a 4E group who were play "because minis" or "because grid" (or "because grid+minis" or whatever). Nor a 3.XE group, for that matter. I know of people who WON'T play a game because it requires minis, but that's a different story. So I think when you flippantly dismiss 4E-style tactical play, and claim 5E has "something for everyone" because it has rules for mini + grid, I think you're not understanding what people actually want. I think it's a failure of understanding that the leads of the 5E team, particularly Mike Mearls have suffered from, too, so I don't think you're crazy to make it, but it is a failure nonetheless. Even 3.XE/PF fans who like tactical combat stuff will find distinctly less in 5E than 4E. Basically, 5E did a good job of providing something for perhaps[I] most [/I]D&D groups (given plenty of people played 4E but didn't really get into the tactical combat and so on), but definitely not for everyone by a long stretch. And a large part of the reason why is the faulty logic we see here, which presumes we want minis/grids for minis/grids sake, not minis/grid for tactics sake. We'd see more of this strange (to me) thinking with the whole "Tactics means facing rules right guys!?" deal later. 2nd Edit - I think the big "Mission Accomplished" (ahem) from this column is providing really strong support for TotM, as that was something that had been on the decline since 3E (indeed, I remember writing rants about how 3E was "forcing" me to use minis/grid back when it had been released!). For the first time, a WotC edition unquestionably supported TotM. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Legends & Lore - A Retrospective
Top