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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mike Mearls Interview with the Escapist
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="sunshadow21" data-source="post: 6369568" data-attributes="member: 6667193"><p>While this is all true, 3.5 was also a far bigger game popularity wise than either it's predecessors or 4E turned out to be. I expect 5E will also, over the course of time, end up closer to earlier numbers than 3rd edition numbers. A big reason is precisely the whole "it's the DM's game" attitude. 3rd edition, and PF, and a great many other games of different stock, engage the players directly and more fully than most editions of D&D have. A tabletop game is not just the DM's game; players have to deal with the most of the same challenges that DMs do, and a dedicated player will likely spend almost as much time outside of a game as the DM will. 3.x became a nightmare to DM, that much is true, and Paizo seems to have recognized this in their many efforts to make it easier for the DM while retaining the aspects that really interested players. 5E, on paper, does a decent job of finding the necessary balance, but in play, it still is going to be very DM reliant, and that could turn into a problem with the wider casual market that wants to know exactly what to expect every time they sit down to play, regardless of what group or DM they are sitting down with. In the end, I agree with the basic concept of what they tried to do, but it's a dangerous line to walk. Simplicity is good, but when you start designing simplicity for the sake of simplicity, you can actually end up making something far more complex and harder to deal with than if you had acknowledged and dealt with the inherent complexity for the very start. Also, after many years of working customer service, I can safely say that relying almost entirely on common sense is not a good core design strategy; people are stupid and will do stupid things if allowed.</p><p></p><p>In the end, both PF and 5E approach the ideal balance, but neither really make it. Because I've already in invested in PF, I'll stick with it while hoping to see evolutions that move it back toward being a bit more DM friendly; 5E isn't likely to see any of my money, however, because at this point as I can look elsewhere and find systems that manage to be both rules light and not entirely dependent on the DM for me as a player to understand what my character can do. 5E tries to do this, and with the right group, I would play it, but as a go to system, it sticks too close to the brand's DM centric roots to be of much interest to me personally.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sunshadow21, post: 6369568, member: 6667193"] While this is all true, 3.5 was also a far bigger game popularity wise than either it's predecessors or 4E turned out to be. I expect 5E will also, over the course of time, end up closer to earlier numbers than 3rd edition numbers. A big reason is precisely the whole "it's the DM's game" attitude. 3rd edition, and PF, and a great many other games of different stock, engage the players directly and more fully than most editions of D&D have. A tabletop game is not just the DM's game; players have to deal with the most of the same challenges that DMs do, and a dedicated player will likely spend almost as much time outside of a game as the DM will. 3.x became a nightmare to DM, that much is true, and Paizo seems to have recognized this in their many efforts to make it easier for the DM while retaining the aspects that really interested players. 5E, on paper, does a decent job of finding the necessary balance, but in play, it still is going to be very DM reliant, and that could turn into a problem with the wider casual market that wants to know exactly what to expect every time they sit down to play, regardless of what group or DM they are sitting down with. In the end, I agree with the basic concept of what they tried to do, but it's a dangerous line to walk. Simplicity is good, but when you start designing simplicity for the sake of simplicity, you can actually end up making something far more complex and harder to deal with than if you had acknowledged and dealt with the inherent complexity for the very start. Also, after many years of working customer service, I can safely say that relying almost entirely on common sense is not a good core design strategy; people are stupid and will do stupid things if allowed. In the end, both PF and 5E approach the ideal balance, but neither really make it. Because I've already in invested in PF, I'll stick with it while hoping to see evolutions that move it back toward being a bit more DM friendly; 5E isn't likely to see any of my money, however, because at this point as I can look elsewhere and find systems that manage to be both rules light and not entirely dependent on the DM for me as a player to understand what my character can do. 5E tries to do this, and with the right group, I would play it, but as a go to system, it sticks too close to the brand's DM centric roots to be of much interest to me personally. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mike Mearls Interview with the Escapist
Top