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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8060070" data-attributes="member: 6790260">They're asking whether the ruleset fits with the way the D&D Next playtest was usually described early on: comprised of "modules," relatively large internally-consistent rules chunks that can be inserted or removed smoothly to "set" a particular play experience, more or less. One of the key things that was frequently teased for 4th edition fans (though usually not with an explicit reference) during the Next playtest was the "tactical combat module," which would enable a richer, more involved combat experience (similar to that offered by 4e) without needing to make every table everywhere play that way. Each table could pick from the palette of modules to have the game experience they wanted, possibly choosing one of 2-4 modules that all fit into a particular category. For example, "resting and recovery" could have Standard Resources, Gritty Survival, High Action, Scarce Magic, or Abundant Magic; "combat" could have Theater of the Mind, Abstract Positioning (think 13A's range bands), and Tactical Positioning; "skills" could have Abilities Only, Simplified Training (4e-style or kinda-sorta current 5e style), Skill Points (3e-style), or Custom Backgrounds (13A style), with Tool Proficiencies as a free module that works with any of those options; etc. etc.Under these lights, an OSR-focused group could take Gritty Survival, Theater of the Mind, and Abilities Only; a group that favors 3e style could go Standard Resources or Abundant Magic, Abstract Positioning, and Skill Points with Tool Proficiencies; and a group that favors 4e style could go High Action, Tactical Positioning, and Simplified Training.As WotC realized (but never openly admitted), developing a system that actually works and which accomplishes these goals is Very Difficult, and requires a ton of playtesting they were never able to do because they spent a year and a half just trying to get basic mechanics figured out. So I don't personally expect this, though if you did do it I'd be damned impressed.And, if I may ask a question of my own:Will you actually recognize that 4e existed and had good ideas worth preserving? Because it would be really really REALLY REALLY awesome for someone to make a game that treats 4e as a valid, fun game in its own right and gives it a breath of fresh air via 5e-affiliated supplements.</blockquote>

Verification