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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6743678" data-attributes="member: 996">Ironically, nothing much about 5e - or 3.5 for that matter - causes a 'bad' DM (though what 'bad' means in this context can vary, it can be just 'not good /enough/' or 'inexperienced' as well as outright pathological) to exactly 'hang himself.'  The main evidence you'll have of sub-par DMing is that you're not having much fun, but that's far from proof that the DM's lack of skill is the problem... If you say so.  I enjoyed 3.5 in it's time (and still play it, once in a while, though I doubt I'd never DM it again), but I can't say I ever found it relaxing.  ;P Interesting.  5e's pendulum-swing back to classic-D&D levels of DM empowerment (and then some, arguably) is largely a reaction against 4e, which, though it made DMing tasks easier than ever, was very player-empowering and above-board, with less built-in DM-dependence for rulings and rule interpretations.  Player-empowerment was not as pronounced when it came to system mastery at chargen/level-up as in 3.5, but still in the same ballpark.  I find it odd that you'd group 4e and 5e together in that regard, as 3.5 and 4e ('modern D&D,' as I often put it) are more in alignment along that dimension, while 5e leans strongly towards the classic game. I'm running 5e to support the game.  It's the current edition, running a past edition wouldn't do the hobby much good, I'd just be creating embittered, un-supported players and sabotaging what little success there is to be had in WotC continuing to publish D&D.  I'd hate to see it go out of print, entirely.  I'm participating as a DM rather than a player, though, not just because DMs are always in short supply, but because 5e's DM empowerment makes it fun to run in the improvisational style that I used with AD&D back in the day.  3.5 and 4e didn't lend themselves to that style, both requiring more prep and rules-adherence (3.5 requiring both, and such broad system mastery to run /well/ that I only made the effort for one relatively short campaign, while 4e depended so little on the DM it barely felt like DMing at all).Pathfinder was just a 'slight varient' on 3.5 when it came out.  Still is closer to 3.5 than any other version of D&D is.  OK, now you just sound like you're shilling for Paizo.  Pathfinder is very much a close cousin in the D&D family, though, so don't feel like you're straying that far. ;P</blockquote>

Verification