Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
PF2 and the adventure day
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7641885" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>It's funny that those are all derivative. </p><p>It's just dialing spell brokedness back up, but not as far up as 3e. That is fundamental to the traditional feel of D&D, though.</p><p></p><p>That last hints at it's true legacy: Consolidating the legacy of TSR era D&D. 5e righted the boat that WotC had started rocking, by unwinding the improvements 3e & 4e had made to the game that were incompatible with the 'soul' of the original. </p><p>Thanks to 5e, D&D going forward will be, essentially(npi), and in perpetuity, what D&D was in the 80s.</p><p></p><p> The whole Big Tent inclusiveness thing was trumpeted from the beginning of the playtest - "innocuous enough to avoid edition warring" is just my cynical spin on it. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p> It has, the same sort of feat Marvel did, just for a lot less money: it took a 40yo property with a nerdy, even cultish, positively disgruntled fan base, and rebooted it in a way that didn't outrage their peculiar expectations and prejudices, while still being approachable enough to sustain a resurgence in interest from more mainstream customers.</p><p></p><p>The former required returning to a more traditional feel, including restoring perennial, intractable, structural issues like LFQW & 5MWD, that had only recently been solved, and falling back on the best traditional way of coping with them: the DM.</p><p></p><p>The latter required toning down the steep learning curve of TSR era baroque heterogenous sub-systems ( which even 3e had managed) and the high bar for system mastery of 3e. </p><p></p><p>The resulting compromise isn't as evocative of the True D&D Experience as the OSR, nor as approachable and quick/easy for new-to-the-hobby potential players to learn as 4e, but it avoided the kind if controversy from established fans that would keep potential new ones from even trying it, and it was readily accessible to returning fans, while not being too off-putting to new ones.</p><p></p><p> Looks? At a glance it looks like 3e or 2e or 1e: there are spells/day tables. </p><p>But you don't even need to pop the hood to see that those tables are a lot more similar to eachother than in 1e, for instance - and, there are /at-wiil attack cantrips/, unthinkable under The True Way of Vance.</p><p></p><p>While not accomplishing the same things, and being limited to primary casters, unified progression, viable at-wills for all, and two recovery cycles are clearly retained from 4e.</p><p></p><p>5e /is/ very much a return to the feel (and failings) of the classic game, but not by re-winding to 3e and fixing it up, but by intentionally breaking 4e.</p><p></p><p> Are in no way surprising if you were aware of the BA goal. Bonus stacking, thus buff stacking and the systematic (and wasteful) 3e-optimal strategy of pre-casting, were simply off the table, they couldn't be added back the way 9 spell levels and LFQW could be.</p><p></p><p> If there had never been an intervening edition that /actually/ fixed those issues, the net, non-trivial reduction in their severity could be rhetorically exaggerated as a 'fix,' but, misrepresenting the re-introduction of solved problem as a fix by disingenuously ignoring that they had already been solved is counter productive in any discussion, even this one.</p><p></p><p> 5e gamers - The new/returning ones driving the not-seen-since-the-80s-fad sales of D&D have zero appetite for learning a second RPG. </p><p></p><p>PF1 leveraged the improbable confluence of the edition war, the OGL, and a database of Dragon/Dungeon subscribers, to, essentially, take up the mantle of D&D with existing 3.x D&Ders.</p><p></p><p>That opportunity has run its course.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7641885, member: 996"] It's funny that those are all derivative. It's just dialing spell brokedness back up, but not as far up as 3e. That is fundamental to the traditional feel of D&D, though. That last hints at it's true legacy: Consolidating the legacy of TSR era D&D. 5e righted the boat that WotC had started rocking, by unwinding the improvements 3e & 4e had made to the game that were incompatible with the 'soul' of the original. Thanks to 5e, D&D going forward will be, essentially(npi), and in perpetuity, what D&D was in the 80s. The whole Big Tent inclusiveness thing was trumpeted from the beginning of the playtest - "innocuous enough to avoid edition warring" is just my cynical spin on it. ;) It has, the same sort of feat Marvel did, just for a lot less money: it took a 40yo property with a nerdy, even cultish, positively disgruntled fan base, and rebooted it in a way that didn't outrage their peculiar expectations and prejudices, while still being approachable enough to sustain a resurgence in interest from more mainstream customers. The former required returning to a more traditional feel, including restoring perennial, intractable, structural issues like LFQW & 5MWD, that had only recently been solved, and falling back on the best traditional way of coping with them: the DM. The latter required toning down the steep learning curve of TSR era baroque heterogenous sub-systems ( which even 3e had managed) and the high bar for system mastery of 3e. The resulting compromise isn't as evocative of the True D&D Experience as the OSR, nor as approachable and quick/easy for new-to-the-hobby potential players to learn as 4e, but it avoided the kind if controversy from established fans that would keep potential new ones from even trying it, and it was readily accessible to returning fans, while not being too off-putting to new ones. Looks? At a glance it looks like 3e or 2e or 1e: there are spells/day tables. But you don't even need to pop the hood to see that those tables are a lot more similar to eachother than in 1e, for instance - and, there are /at-wiil attack cantrips/, unthinkable under The True Way of Vance. While not accomplishing the same things, and being limited to primary casters, unified progression, viable at-wills for all, and two recovery cycles are clearly retained from 4e. 5e /is/ very much a return to the feel (and failings) of the classic game, but not by re-winding to 3e and fixing it up, but by intentionally breaking 4e. Are in no way surprising if you were aware of the BA goal. Bonus stacking, thus buff stacking and the systematic (and wasteful) 3e-optimal strategy of pre-casting, were simply off the table, they couldn't be added back the way 9 spell levels and LFQW could be. If there had never been an intervening edition that /actually/ fixed those issues, the net, non-trivial reduction in their severity could be rhetorically exaggerated as a 'fix,' but, misrepresenting the re-introduction of solved problem as a fix by disingenuously ignoring that they had already been solved is counter productive in any discussion, even this one. 5e gamers - The new/returning ones driving the not-seen-since-the-80s-fad sales of D&D have zero appetite for learning a second RPG. PF1 leveraged the improbable confluence of the edition war, the OGL, and a database of Dragon/Dungeon subscribers, to, essentially, take up the mantle of D&D with existing 3.x D&Ders. That opportunity has run its course. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
PF2 and the adventure day
Top