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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Eirikrautha" data-source="post: 6357617" data-attributes="member: 6777843">I'm not sure whether you are agreeing with me or arguing in the first part.  My contention is that 5e is purposely reducing the "crowd-control" aspect of tactics that grew up out of 3e and grid-based combat.  While all classes do rise in power, bounded accuracy and other systems still restrain their ability to roflstomp low-level threats.  From Mike Mearls, himself: "So things like Orcs and Ogres are still viable threats at higher levels: You just fight more of them." (<a href="http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/tabletop/11554-Inside-the-Launch-of-the-New-Dungeons-Dragons-With-Designer-Mike.3" target="_blank">www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/tabletop/11554-Inside-the-Launch-of-the-New-Dungeons-Dragons-With-Designer-Mike.3</a>).  So while a wizard might be able to fireball a group of mooks, that doesn't eliminate the threat of some getting to him.Battlefield "control" is a relatively new concept (I think I'll start a thread about this later), partly based on the return to grid combat as default and partly because of the influence of MMOs.  Compare "Dig" in 1e or 2e to "Create Pit," the original was far more useful as a way to shape the battlefield before an engagement than as an in-combat mechanic.  Likewise, the only "opportunity attack" from 1e and 2e require the opponent to be fleeing from melee.  Repositioning to another melee combatant within the melee gained no such free attacks (RAW).  So the rules to allow players to force mobs away from squishies pretty much are recent inventions (2e did allow an adjacent ally to block for a withdrawing character... but that's a far cry from battlefield control).Once again, this is an intended change.  The primary restraint on 1e and 2e casters were their limited number of spells and the danger of casting in combat (their fragility).  Later rules both increased the number and efficacy of spells, as well as allowed martial characters to funnel mooks away from the casters.  Both of these exacerbated the LFQW problem.  Note that 5e has reestablished both of the features of earlier D&Ds: fewer spells (with cantrips to keep the players engaged and having fun) and the reduction of crowd control.  I don't see how you can say that this is not the intended outcome...</blockquote>

Verification