NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 9068927" data-attributes="member: 7635">That depends on how you're measuring. Do you count 3.0 and 3.5 separately? What about Pathfinder? Do you consider the volume of all the 3pp products that coexisted with it? I don't think you can truly compare all the products that were compatible with the 3e PHB with all the products compatible with the 4e PHB and say they are equal. And while I do agree 3e was a departure from AD&D, I don't agree it's a 180 degree change. Much of it was based on the common complaints that a decade of AD&D produced. Moreover, the core game play loop was the same: the fighter had feats but felt like the fighter. Spellcasting was similar enough that if you know the old system, you can understand the new. Far more far more so, 4e introduced ideas that were never seen in any D&D prior like spells "attacking" saves (er defenses), level 17 spells and the whole ADEU power structure. It had less connective tissue to AD&D than 3e had to AD&D and it's the connective tissue that gets people who aren't dissatisfied to switch. (My go to example of this: imagine trying to explain to a non -gamer how a wizard casts fireball. Four editions of the game will use similar terminology: third level spell slot, saving throw for half, etc. One edition will not.)Which was ultimately my point; a large chunk of the audience wasn't ready for something like 4e yet. You need at least another iteration or so to ease into those changes. You need the fighter to get abilities that recover on a short rest like the 5e fighter to guide into the slayer/knight of essentials to finally guide into something like the 4e fighter with dailies and encounter powers. The time was wrong for a 4e style evolution and the audience wasn't there yet.</blockquote>

Verification