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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Presentation vs design... vs philosophy
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="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 7935215" data-attributes="member: 87792"><p>The difference between literally any of those cases is that you need to actually settle on one of those games for the core rules and then tweak the others to fit. In some cases it's minor tweaks, most of which can be handled DM side (what are your saving throws? In particular does a paralysis save come in the Death/Poison category or the Petrification/Polymorph?) - or what shape is a horse.</p><p></p><p>In 4e's case it's utterly seamless. We aren't talking about "Mash things together and bend one, other, or both of them slightly until they fit" we're talking about "fits together seamlessly".</p><p></p><p>If a class changed between one edition and another you would almost ever only use one version of the class. For example no one would use the 3.0 Ranger alongside a 3.5 Ranger, a 3.5 Fighter alongside a Pathfinder Fighter, or a 1e Bard alongside a 2e Bard. Meanwhile I've played a 4eE Warlock (hexblade) alongside a 4e PHB Warlock - different enough classes to be very distinctive but worked together seamlessly and I'm not even sure the DM knew they came from different sources (although both of us did).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You're confusing ten years with fifteen. Rulings not rules is thunderously empowering <em>compared to the actively disempowering nature of 3.0 and 3.5</em>.</p><p></p><p>Meanwhile it's a thunderously disempowering statement when put into the context of 4e which provided tools to empower the DM. It's saying "No you can't have the tools. Instead you should be able to make everything you need with your bare hands." Fortunately I can bring my toolkit with me - but there is a reason that every 4e table I have been at had half the players ready and willing to DM while 5e in my experience is much more often scrabbling round for someone to DM (even if it's nowhere near 3.X bad that way).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You mean the edition of D&D which clogged up the game with unnecessary lookup tables for attack matrixes, and hid away things like rules for helmets?</p><p></p><p>As someone who tried to learn to both play and run 1e from just the 1e rulebooks if you think 1e (as opposed to B/X or BECMI) was empowering you're confusing empowerment with makework. On the other hand it is likely you (like a most people who kept playing 1e) were using B/X with 1e as a splatbook.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>"Do what you want" is less empowering than "Do what you want and here's $1000 and a chainsaw" even if you have no intention of touching the chainsaw.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The more I think about this the more I find it a perfect illustration of exactly why I get confused by claims that oD&D is empowering to the DM. You are taking (as a lot of Old School fans do) the idea that driving on the roads is a bad thing and the only place you could possibly want to drive is on artificially-flattened prarie. To me that is even more disempowering than "You must drive this car on the roads and only on the roads"; roads take me to places I want to go. And that's why almost everyone who drives uses roads.</p><p></p><p>If I'm to be empowered what I want is a <em>roadworthy all-terrain car</em>. And driving on prarie may be fun - but I don't want to just drive on prarie. I know perfectly well the 4e car can't drive in the swamp (neither can most cars to be honest). And I know perfectly well that the old school car is better on prarie/sandboxes. But when it comes to driving on roads/adventure paths the game that starts wizards out with 1d4 rolled hit points and might even start the <em>fighter </em>out with a single hit point is simply terrible (and there are reasons Dragonlance needed the Obscure Death Rule).</p><p></p><p>I'm not saying that either driving on prarie or old school sandboxes/dungeoncrawls are bad. They aren't - and I'm running one right now in 5e. I'm saying that to me empowerment means two things. First I can go wherever <em>I</em> want, and second that I will be supported in doing so. This includes prarie - but also road, mountains, forests, and other places. Or sandboxes but also adventure paths, cinematic combats, character driven RP with mechanical representation of motivation, and other places.</p><p></p><p>Meanwhile (and part responding to [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER]) Apocalypse World is more like "So you like to go fast through forests. Here's a nitrous-oxide injected quad bike!" And no it's not much good driving around on praries. It doesn't try to be, and it's not roadworthy either. It's also intended for much shorter runs than D&D. 4e meanwhile is an all terrain vehicle</p><p></p><p>But as for support, how does coming with a built in car GPS, a spare petrol tank, a spare tyre, and even snow chains make you less free?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>To follow your analogy by your own description <em>you are only driving in pre-prepared prarie with the holes filled in</em>. That's not empowered - it's every bit as diadactically constrained and constricted as only driving on the road, but the scenery you will see is less interesting because it's all prarie, and if you're lucky you might find the biggest ball of twine in Minnesota. It also does not give you greater power than the power to decide where to go and whether to go to the prarie, the mountains, stick to the roads for some sight seeing, or go through the forests. </p><p></p><p>Meanwhile 4e is great on roads, superb in the mountains, decent in forests, and mediocre on prarie that comes with a spare tank and a GPS with built in maps as standard. 5e is a decent all-rounder on all terrains (better than 4e on prarie) but doesn't have the GPS or the spare tank.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Because it's either cheaper, more reliable, or looks better. </p><p></p><p>Or, as a better sales pitch, if the only thing on the market is a solid ford compact there are very good reasons for buying a volvo estate.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 7935215, member: 87792"] The difference between literally any of those cases is that you need to actually settle on one of those games for the core rules and then tweak the others to fit. In some cases it's minor tweaks, most of which can be handled DM side (what are your saving throws? In particular does a paralysis save come in the Death/Poison category or the Petrification/Polymorph?) - or what shape is a horse. In 4e's case it's utterly seamless. We aren't talking about "Mash things together and bend one, other, or both of them slightly until they fit" we're talking about "fits together seamlessly". If a class changed between one edition and another you would almost ever only use one version of the class. For example no one would use the 3.0 Ranger alongside a 3.5 Ranger, a 3.5 Fighter alongside a Pathfinder Fighter, or a 1e Bard alongside a 2e Bard. Meanwhile I've played a 4eE Warlock (hexblade) alongside a 4e PHB Warlock - different enough classes to be very distinctive but worked together seamlessly and I'm not even sure the DM knew they came from different sources (although both of us did). You're confusing ten years with fifteen. Rulings not rules is thunderously empowering [I]compared to the actively disempowering nature of 3.0 and 3.5[/I]. Meanwhile it's a thunderously disempowering statement when put into the context of 4e which provided tools to empower the DM. It's saying "No you can't have the tools. Instead you should be able to make everything you need with your bare hands." Fortunately I can bring my toolkit with me - but there is a reason that every 4e table I have been at had half the players ready and willing to DM while 5e in my experience is much more often scrabbling round for someone to DM (even if it's nowhere near 3.X bad that way). You mean the edition of D&D which clogged up the game with unnecessary lookup tables for attack matrixes, and hid away things like rules for helmets? As someone who tried to learn to both play and run 1e from just the 1e rulebooks if you think 1e (as opposed to B/X or BECMI) was empowering you're confusing empowerment with makework. On the other hand it is likely you (like a most people who kept playing 1e) were using B/X with 1e as a splatbook. "Do what you want" is less empowering than "Do what you want and here's $1000 and a chainsaw" even if you have no intention of touching the chainsaw. The more I think about this the more I find it a perfect illustration of exactly why I get confused by claims that oD&D is empowering to the DM. You are taking (as a lot of Old School fans do) the idea that driving on the roads is a bad thing and the only place you could possibly want to drive is on artificially-flattened prarie. To me that is even more disempowering than "You must drive this car on the roads and only on the roads"; roads take me to places I want to go. And that's why almost everyone who drives uses roads. If I'm to be empowered what I want is a [I]roadworthy all-terrain car[/I]. And driving on prarie may be fun - but I don't want to just drive on prarie. I know perfectly well the 4e car can't drive in the swamp (neither can most cars to be honest). And I know perfectly well that the old school car is better on prarie/sandboxes. But when it comes to driving on roads/adventure paths the game that starts wizards out with 1d4 rolled hit points and might even start the [I]fighter [/I]out with a single hit point is simply terrible (and there are reasons Dragonlance needed the Obscure Death Rule). I'm not saying that either driving on prarie or old school sandboxes/dungeoncrawls are bad. They aren't - and I'm running one right now in 5e. I'm saying that to me empowerment means two things. First I can go wherever [I]I[/I] want, and second that I will be supported in doing so. This includes prarie - but also road, mountains, forests, and other places. Or sandboxes but also adventure paths, cinematic combats, character driven RP with mechanical representation of motivation, and other places. Meanwhile (and part responding to [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER]) Apocalypse World is more like "So you like to go fast through forests. Here's a nitrous-oxide injected quad bike!" And no it's not much good driving around on praries. It doesn't try to be, and it's not roadworthy either. It's also intended for much shorter runs than D&D. 4e meanwhile is an all terrain vehicle But as for support, how does coming with a built in car GPS, a spare petrol tank, a spare tyre, and even snow chains make you less free? To follow your analogy by your own description [I]you are only driving in pre-prepared prarie with the holes filled in[/I]. That's not empowered - it's every bit as diadactically constrained and constricted as only driving on the road, but the scenery you will see is less interesting because it's all prarie, and if you're lucky you might find the biggest ball of twine in Minnesota. It also does not give you greater power than the power to decide where to go and whether to go to the prarie, the mountains, stick to the roads for some sight seeing, or go through the forests. Meanwhile 4e is great on roads, superb in the mountains, decent in forests, and mediocre on prarie that comes with a spare tank and a GPS with built in maps as standard. 5e is a decent all-rounder on all terrains (better than 4e on prarie) but doesn't have the GPS or the spare tank. Because it's either cheaper, more reliable, or looks better. Or, as a better sales pitch, if the only thing on the market is a solid ford compact there are very good reasons for buying a volvo estate. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Presentation vs design... vs philosophy
Top