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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7166930" data-attributes="member: 996">One of the goals articulated early in the Next playtest was to be able to play 5e in the 'styles' of past editions.  If you liked 4e, and want a more 4e feel out of 5e, you should not have to approach that as a hidden agenda for fear being told to bugger off and play 4e because 5e's not for you.  5e comes with a strong TSR-era feel, throw in feats & MCing and you get a note of 3.x on the finish.  If you want even more of either, the DMG has various 'modules' to help with that.    4e bits are there, but they're burried deep and don't accomplish the same things, and the supposed options to bring out more of a 4e experience simply fail to do so.  That said, 3.x fans coming here, looking to tweak the game more to their liking /also/ get wrongly told off for it. Actually, the way he's harmonizing melee attack and cantrip progression is not much like it was in 4e.  Damage scaling wasn't that dramatic, across the board, in 4e at-wills.  At /epic/ you got a second [W] with your at-will.  Damage scaling in 5e is much faster and more dramatic than in any prior edition, but especially 4e, because it's doing most of the 'heavy lifting' in providing a feeling of advancement in spite of BA.  The way it's done with cantrips & SA, though, is very different from the way it's done with other weapon attacks.  Weapon attacks scaling via extra attacks is more 'old school,' while the fast linear scaling of cantrips is distinctly 5e.  Adding dice of damage to melee attacks instead of adding extra attacks was done in the Next Playtest.  What Xeviat is proposing is actually closer to some of the playtest modules than to 4e. To the extent that you view 5e as a final product, meant to be played 'as is,' take-it-or-leave-it, there are a tremendous number of things very wrong with it.  They all go away when you view it, instead, as a starting point from which to run the game you want to run.   Not remotely what's going on.  5e is /not/ perfect.  3.x MCing suffered from caster/caster MCs combining very inefficiently and being sub-optimal, even non-viable.  5e /fixed/ that.  It then turned around, and broke the way ASIs and Extra Attack combined, making it very inefficient & suboptimal, in much the same way that caster/casters were in 3.x - that's not edition warring, it's just, well, little weird, really.  But, MCing is optional, as such, whether to use it is a ball firmly in the DM's court - and he can do whatever he wants to that ball before tossing it to the players.  If the players don't like the DM's version, fine, no ball for them. Now that's edition warring.   Fighters in 4e did not cast spells.  Fighters in 5e /do/ cast spells, and it's OK.  There's some very cool stuff in 4e & 5e - and 13A - that each could be improved by 'porting to the other.   'Cause none of 'em are perfect.</blockquote>

Verification