Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
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="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 7758801" data-attributes="member: 6779196"><p>And I’m sure I don’t agree with that thing I never said.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I disagree. There were all sorts of interesting ways to play some classes, some of which did break the game and in so doing made them not fun. Other classes, like the barbarian, were just boring to play no matter what. 5e is overall an improvement over that, but still a little lacking.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Reducing complexity isn’t the reason Mearls stated for the changes, so I don’t see your point here.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I really, really don’t care about your opinions of 4e. I’m here to talk about 5e.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Reducing rules overhead was not their stated design goal, so I’m not sure what tree you’re barking up.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Thats all great, but it’s a game too. I’m glad we can make our characters’ narrative as different as we like, but it would be nice if our characters could also <em>do</em> different things as a result of those narrative differences. If the <em>game</em> actually demonstrated differences in the story.</p><p></p><p></p><p>K.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Nothing about having more choices for how to build your character prevents making choices according to your character’s personality as opposed to tactical reasons. Also, one does not have to make poor tactical decisions to roleplay.</p><p></p><p></p><p>See, I’d prefer they developed a game with a higher degree of mechanical depth than 5e, but still made low complexity a priority, and allowed the DM the flexibility to make rulings according to the needs of their table, instead of trying to write the rules to make their role as minor as possible.</p><p></p><p></p><p>No, I understand that both changes served the same goal, I just don’t think both were necessary to accomplish that goal to a satisfactory degree.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I never said I was a fan of powergaming. I said I don’t think powergaming is a bad thing. What I’m a fan of is making decisions, for both tactical and roleplay reasons.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You’d guess wrong. Kindly don’t assume such things about my play preferences.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I don’t like playing the same (or same kind of) character over and over though. I like playing many different characters. I like playing them in many different ways. And I like being able to express those differences through both story and mechanics. If you want to insult my play style, the angle you should go for is not power gamer but special snowflake. I like to express my creativity by playing the most unique, different characters I can, and I want the difference to be both in how I narrate my actions and in how my characters behave mechanically.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 7758801, member: 6779196"] And I’m sure I don’t agree with that thing I never said. I disagree. There were all sorts of interesting ways to play some classes, some of which did break the game and in so doing made them not fun. Other classes, like the barbarian, were just boring to play no matter what. 5e is overall an improvement over that, but still a little lacking. Reducing complexity isn’t the reason Mearls stated for the changes, so I don’t see your point here. I really, really don’t care about your opinions of 4e. I’m here to talk about 5e. Reducing rules overhead was not their stated design goal, so I’m not sure what tree you’re barking up. Thats all great, but it’s a game too. I’m glad we can make our characters’ narrative as different as we like, but it would be nice if our characters could also [i]do[/i] different things as a result of those narrative differences. If the [i]game[/i] actually demonstrated differences in the story. K. Nothing about having more choices for how to build your character prevents making choices according to your character’s personality as opposed to tactical reasons. Also, one does not have to make poor tactical decisions to roleplay. See, I’d prefer they developed a game with a higher degree of mechanical depth than 5e, but still made low complexity a priority, and allowed the DM the flexibility to make rulings according to the needs of their table, instead of trying to write the rules to make their role as minor as possible. No, I understand that both changes served the same goal, I just don’t think both were necessary to accomplish that goal to a satisfactory degree. I never said I was a fan of powergaming. I said I don’t think powergaming is a bad thing. What I’m a fan of is making decisions, for both tactical and roleplay reasons. You’d guess wrong. Kindly don’t assume such things about my play preferences. I don’t like playing the same (or same kind of) character over and over though. I like playing many different characters. I like playing them in many different ways. And I like being able to express those differences through both story and mechanics. If you want to insult my play style, the angle you should go for is not power gamer but special snowflake. I like to express my creativity by playing the most unique, different characters I can, and I want the difference to be both in how I narrate my actions and in how my characters behave mechanically. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
Top