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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rogue Agent" data-source="post: 5759732" data-attributes="member: 6673496">You can take a module written for any edition of D&D from 1974 to 2008, run it in any edition of D&D from 1974 to 2008, and have a nearly identical playing experience.(There are a handful of exceptions: Sleep. Giants. Dragons. A handful of other spells and monsters that had their effects or balance seriously revised. Taking PCs from any edition and backing them up into a previous edition can also be difficult due to missing options, but the reverse is usually trivial except for demi-human multiclassing and BECMI's race-as-class.)Take that same module and run it in 4E and the first problem you'll run into is that you're no longer able to do a straight-forward stat-block for stat-block conversion. (This is true for both the monsters and the PCs.) Overcome that and you'll discover that the module plays very differently in previous editions than it does in 4E.You can do the reverse, too: Take 4E modules and run them in previous editions for significantly different gameplay experiences.Show me the 4E PC that has Vancian spellcasting and plays just like a 1E magic-user.... you can't do that? Right. That's because the gameplay was fundamentally altered. I can make that character in 3E trivially. It's completely impossible in 4E.And that's just the most straight-forward example. There really is a major shift in pre-4E (which focused on strategic challenges) and 4E (which focuses almost entirely on tactical challenges) that has a deep and meaningful impact on gameplay.There's probably a lot of truth to that. If you can't see how playing a fighter or magic-user or thief in 1E is pretty much identical to playing a fighter or wizard or rogue in 3E (despite the math being inverted), then I don't think any amount of forum discussion is going to make you see it.3E was a major departure in terms of how the math worked. Getting everything pointed in the same direction and most of the system operating off a unified mechanic was a major change. But the fundamental gameplay really wasn't shifted that much.Honestly? You might as well take a gun, put it into D&D's mouth, and pull the trigger.I get the appeal of a modular system for system-tweakers and (some) experienced players. But such a game would have all the mainstream appeal of a root canal.Nor is it clear to me how you could possibly produce supplementary material that could be simultaneously compatible with an OD&D-like game, a 3E-like game, and a 4E-like game.</blockquote>

Verification