D&D (2024) People on this forum are creating confusion. Not WotC.

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

But nobody minds that every caster in 5e save the warlock plays identically, and in fact they want the warlock to be more similar to all the other casters

They don't? I mind! I don't like the direction they took with the changes to warlock casting (not a dealbreaker... I just don't see the necessity of that change, and disapprove of the vanillafying...). Just because that mechanism appeared in a playtest doesn't mean it will for sure appear that way in the final product though. It's a weather balloon; the more people express their displeasure, the less likely the change will be made.

All that doesn't change the fact that in 4E there was a similarity (not identicality, mind you... there's a difference to the action and feel of a crowd control power over a short range weapon attack) between the way the classes felt in play (not just casters, all classes) because of AEDU.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Stating my opinion of 4th edition is not edition warring.

PS - I considered your comment edition warring because the OP is not about 4e. It is about the current situation with 5e and the playtest. 4e was just brought up because the quote was relevant to the discussion of the current situation.

Therefore bringing up the quality of 4e was off topic and seems to be just you wanting to say 4e is bad.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

It's almost like marketing and public perception are two different things.

Heck, reality and public perception can be two different things!

 

[jdrakeh]

4e was harmed by being undercooked and not enough runs through a editor and some playtesting.

Yes, this. I specifically avoided 4e because of the 40+ pages of errata for the core books. I was waiting for them to incorporate all of that errata into subsequent printings of the core books which, to my knowledge, never happened. Instead we got the Essentials books which, for me, was a move in the right direction but a little too late.

 

[S'mon]

The main area where they may have misstepped is focusing too much on old school dungeons as their base assumption.

"Dungeons and Dragons - Now With No Dungeons!"?!?

 

[Umbran]

I thought 4E was mostly harmed by not being a very good game. And I was one of those people who was looking forward to its release, but once I sat down and played it a few times I realized it wasn't the game for me.

4e was harmed in large part by equating, "wasn't the game for me," with, "not a very good game."

 

[UngeheuerLich]

4e was harmed in large part by equating, "wasn't the game for me," with, "not a very good game."

... and those who thought so spreading the same (false) rumors everywhere...

... and WotC trying to force everyone into that system.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Regarding 4e powers, I've always thought of those as metagame constructs rather than in-fiction constructs. So when the Fighter uses Come And Get It to make all nearby enemies pile onto him, they're not under any kind of compulsion, supernatural or otherwise, they do it because that's what the story calls for!

 

[Oofta]

He jumped in on a thread where I said something to tell me I was wrong. In what world is that me doing something to him?

You made a claim that people were misrepresenting the game. I disagree, you're assuming your opinion is the only one that is valid on this topic and that everyone else is just making stuff up to hurt the game. People discussing, and potentially disagreeing, on topics is kind of what this forum is all about.

 

[pemerton]

my 4E fighter had an aura of automatic damage, could pull creatures (even ones that didn't share a language in) in so he could smack them. There was no way to envision these things as anything other than supernatural.

That's not a problem I ever had.