Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 3956483" data-attributes="member: 2011">My thoughts on this:2E to 3E was a mechanics improvement system. The main exceptions to this was Feats, Prestige Classes, and Attacks of Opportunity (and even AoOs were a sideeffect of an improved initiative system).Examples of where game elements existed in 2E, but were mostly just improved upon: Initiative, Magic Item Creation, Saves, Spell School rules, +1 to ability bonues for every 2 ability points, Spell descriptions, etc. Most of the stuff in 3E was &quot;How do I improve the mechanics of what I currently have?&quot;, not &quot;What new things am I going to add or what fluff elements am I going to remove or change?&quot; Sure, since the mechanics changed, they were new to people. But, the mechanics (i.e. crunch) were new, most of the fluff of the game was pretty much the same.The mechanics changes are somewhat true from what we know in 4E as well. Turn Undead will probably still be there, they just improved the mechanics. Skills will still be there, they just improved the mechanics. Most of the D20 math will be there, but they (hopefully) are just improving it.But, 4E will probably have more fluff changes than 3E did. 3E has most of the same races as 1E and 2E. 3E has most of the same classes as 1E and 2E. I suspect that the feel between 1E/2E is closer to 3E than 3E will be to 4E.And to some people, fluff is more important than crunch. The designers could change a mechanics rule in one of three different good ways and people won't care too much which one is chosen.The most significant change for 4E is probably the change from per day to per encounter abilities. This is similar to a change from playing Wizards to playing Sorcerers. The game will be easier for players to play, hence, WotC hopes that more people will play it. There will be less &quot;which spell should I prepare&quot; and more &quot;let's go&quot;. A good thing, but still a major paradigm shift in DND gaming and thinking.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 3956483, member: 2011"] My thoughts on this: 2E to 3E was a mechanics improvement system. The main exceptions to this was Feats, Prestige Classes, and Attacks of Opportunity (and even AoOs were a sideeffect of an improved initiative system). Examples of where game elements existed in 2E, but were mostly just improved upon: Initiative, Magic Item Creation, Saves, Spell School rules, +1 to ability bonues for every 2 ability points, Spell descriptions, etc. Most of the stuff in 3E was "How do I improve the mechanics of what I currently have?", not "What new things am I going to add or what fluff elements am I going to remove or change?" Sure, since the mechanics changed, they were new to people. But, the mechanics (i.e. crunch) were new, most of the fluff of the game was pretty much the same. The mechanics changes are somewhat true from what we know in 4E as well. Turn Undead will probably still be there, they just improved the mechanics. Skills will still be there, they just improved the mechanics. Most of the D20 math will be there, but they (hopefully) are just improving it. But, 4E will probably have more fluff changes than 3E did. 3E has most of the same races as 1E and 2E. 3E has most of the same classes as 1E and 2E. I suspect that the feel between 1E/2E is closer to 3E than 3E will be to 4E. And to some people, fluff is more important than crunch. The designers could change a mechanics rule in one of three different good ways and people won't care too much which one is chosen. The most significant change for 4E is probably the change from per day to per encounter abilities. This is similar to a change from playing Wizards to playing Sorcerers. The game will be easier for players to play, hence, WotC hopes that more people will play it. There will be less "which spell should I prepare" and more "let's go". A good thing, but still a major paradigm shift in DND gaming and thinking. [/QUOTE]

Verification