Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8902788" data-attributes="member: 18">The funny thing is 4E was also kind of a bad design for a VTT, because of the sheer huge number of Immediate Actions, Interrupts, and Reactions that you at higher levels, which is stuff that's very difficult to automate in a VTT (or a videogame, note) without it becoming kind of annoying. There are a lot of other issues too of a more minor nature.However, certainly 3.XE would have been a lot better, and slightly altered 4E would also have worked well - indeed I expect if their VTT plans for 4E had gone, well, we'd have seen 4E move in that direction with a different 4.5E or the like.5E is a bad starting point for two reasons:1) It's not very dependent on a grid/map to play. I feel it actually plays better TtoM than with a grid, but either way, it doesn't need it.2) It is very DM-dependent, in that the role of the DM was vastly and intentionally expanded over 3.XE/4E, and a lot of rules were "vague on purpose", which has been a mixed bag for the game, but has at least avoided the insane proliferation of rules that 3.XE and PF particularly had.But it looks like 1D&D wants to decrease 2, which will, in practice, make D&D easier to DM for newer DMs, and easier to get more automated in a VTT (and easier for an AI to DM), at the cost of making D&D less flexible and perhaps less broadly appealing. But the Age of the Apology Edition is over; the Age of the Cashgrab has begun. The sort of people who enjoy flexibility can all go hang, because we don't give WotC enough dollar bills y'all.</blockquote>

Verification