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="amerigoV" data-source="post: 5105150">I recall seeing discussions on Monte's boards years ago where they wanted to make more changes to D&D for 3.0 but felt they could only slaughter so many sacred cows. In reality, it took 2.5 editions (3, 3.5, and 4.0) to completely move away from the direction of 1e and 2e. Lets ask the hypothetical: would many of the design concepts in 4e have flown if it were the system instead of 1e back in the 1980s? I would say yes, they would. Its a strong, balanced system. It would have provided that same strong direction that 1e did. 4e has caused a split cuz they were moving against 25 years of a similiar directions in 1e, 2e, and some of 3e. A wizard under 4e just looks and feels different than prior versions regardless of the underlying mechanics. If you like it, then you will like the rest of it. If not, then you probably will not like it.Its like a car - the base controls of a car have been unchanged for untold time. Sure, Ford could suddenly make the controls like an Xbox controller, but people will complain ('specially on the internet) because it is different, does not fit their driving style, is not backwards compatable with their other cars, is too "video-gamey", etc.So, to answer the question, it depends on timing. If the concept got in there at an early time, it would be fine as it would have become the paradigm. Its changing the course that is hard.{FYI - I am a Savage Worlds guy now - just using D&D in the examples as it is the big dog}</blockquote>

Verification