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 coming! 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
D&D Older Editions
Mike Mearls on how D&D 4E could have looked
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="Hussar" data-source="post: 7764160" data-attributes="member: 22779"><p>Oh, hey, I get that. 5e is FAR more accessibly written. And it comes paired with really excellent adventures that take advantage of the best parts of the system. 4e's biggest failure was in how it was presented. Skill Challenges are a fantastic idea, but, the first 4e DMG didn't present them that way at all. Rituals were a fantastic idea that never really went anywhere. </p><p></p><p>If the DM was coming from a tradition of less traditional games, then 4e made immediate sense and not a problem. But, I think, for DM's who weren't into the more "indie" (if that's the right word) tradition of games, then 4e fell right into that "Uncanny Valley" region that someone here (and I forget who) talks about. </p><p></p><p>So, for some, the notion that you'd use the skill system and a "fightery" character to produce magical effects makes intuitive sense. These are fantasy heroes and legendary ones at that. Of course they can wrestle death. Of course they can hold a weapon in the forge. So on and so forth. That's what legendary heroes <em>do</em>. </p><p></p><p>Then, for others, this notion is nonsensical. It means that the world is inconsistent. It tends to rub up against the idea that the mechanics of the game somehow describe the world that the game takes place in. Which means that when you put your hand in fire, you get burned. Unless you have magic. Since a fighter doesn't have magic, the fighter gets burned. If you want to play a character that can put his or her hand in fire, you MUST play an inherently magical character, or gain magic items that will allow you to do so.</p><p></p><p>My issue with that second way of playing is that it makes the DM very apparent in the game - Oh, look, you just <em>happened</em> to find that thing that lets you do the thing you wanted to do and could do if you had just taken a magic using class. And it makes the DM very much at the forefront of having to decide whether a given action is possible or not. I would prefer, and this is just my preference, that that decision was more taken up by the mechanics rather than relying so heavily on the DM. Relying on the DM is problematic because many of us lack the maths background to make good decisions, particularly in the middle of play.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 7764160, member: 22779"] Oh, hey, I get that. 5e is FAR more accessibly written. And it comes paired with really excellent adventures that take advantage of the best parts of the system. 4e's biggest failure was in how it was presented. Skill Challenges are a fantastic idea, but, the first 4e DMG didn't present them that way at all. Rituals were a fantastic idea that never really went anywhere. If the DM was coming from a tradition of less traditional games, then 4e made immediate sense and not a problem. But, I think, for DM's who weren't into the more "indie" (if that's the right word) tradition of games, then 4e fell right into that "Uncanny Valley" region that someone here (and I forget who) talks about. So, for some, the notion that you'd use the skill system and a "fightery" character to produce magical effects makes intuitive sense. These are fantasy heroes and legendary ones at that. Of course they can wrestle death. Of course they can hold a weapon in the forge. So on and so forth. That's what legendary heroes [I]do[/I]. Then, for others, this notion is nonsensical. It means that the world is inconsistent. It tends to rub up against the idea that the mechanics of the game somehow describe the world that the game takes place in. Which means that when you put your hand in fire, you get burned. Unless you have magic. Since a fighter doesn't have magic, the fighter gets burned. If you want to play a character that can put his or her hand in fire, you MUST play an inherently magical character, or gain magic items that will allow you to do so. My issue with that second way of playing is that it makes the DM very apparent in the game - Oh, look, you just [I]happened[/I] to find that thing that lets you do the thing you wanted to do and could do if you had just taken a magic using class. And it makes the DM very much at the forefront of having to decide whether a given action is possible or not. I would prefer, and this is just my preference, that that decision was more taken up by the mechanics rather than relying so heavily on the DM. Relying on the DM is problematic because many of us lack the maths background to make good decisions, particularly in the middle of play. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Mike Mearls on how D&D 4E could have looked
Top