Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Pros and Cons of going mainstream
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="Hussar" data-source="post: 6127915" data-attributes="member: 22779"><p>I agree with most of what you said.</p><p></p><p>Only thing is, I don't think that 2e was very successful using the 1e rules for a more story style. The reason that 2e was, for the longest time, the red-headed stepchild of D&D is because it tried to be a bunch of things for a bunch of different styles but generally failed at all of them. Die-hard 1e fans hated it because it was too poncy and into Thespianism and the story gamers hated it and fled for Vampire and other games of that ilk.</p><p></p><p>4e, IMO, fails because it is so transparent. It doesn't hold anyone's hands. People suddenly see under the hood and they don't like it. Take the whole, "Encounters must be winnable" line. That's not what 4e says. 4e says that, by and large, most encounters that the PC's face are winnable. Now, you never saw anything like that in the 1e DMG because Gygax didn't have the luxury of 30 years of gaming to look back on and make pronouncements like that. But, the 4e devs did. They looked at the modules and whatnot produced over the decades and made a pretty easy generalization - most encounters that the PC's face are, in fact, winnable. </p><p></p><p>3e went some way down this road. When you read the CR/EL guidelines, they pretty much say the same thing. It might be fuzzier - but when most encounters, according to the guidelines, are EL=Party level par, then most encounters are winnable fairly easily.</p><p></p><p>Thing is, 3e monsters vs parties were so tight that it's a very fine line between a cakewalk and dead PC's. The monsters didn't scale very well. AD&D isn't really a problem since monsters in combat, outside of save or die, were individually so weak. 3e, OTOH, was a much different animal. 4e is different again in that it makes the monster math 100% visible to the DM. A level X monster can do Y to Z damage. Raise the level of the monster and the damage scales. </p><p></p><p>I honestly think what people are really reacting to is the transparency of 4e.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6127915, member: 22779"] I agree with most of what you said. Only thing is, I don't think that 2e was very successful using the 1e rules for a more story style. The reason that 2e was, for the longest time, the red-headed stepchild of D&D is because it tried to be a bunch of things for a bunch of different styles but generally failed at all of them. Die-hard 1e fans hated it because it was too poncy and into Thespianism and the story gamers hated it and fled for Vampire and other games of that ilk. 4e, IMO, fails because it is so transparent. It doesn't hold anyone's hands. People suddenly see under the hood and they don't like it. Take the whole, "Encounters must be winnable" line. That's not what 4e says. 4e says that, by and large, most encounters that the PC's face are winnable. Now, you never saw anything like that in the 1e DMG because Gygax didn't have the luxury of 30 years of gaming to look back on and make pronouncements like that. But, the 4e devs did. They looked at the modules and whatnot produced over the decades and made a pretty easy generalization - most encounters that the PC's face are, in fact, winnable. 3e went some way down this road. When you read the CR/EL guidelines, they pretty much say the same thing. It might be fuzzier - but when most encounters, according to the guidelines, are EL=Party level par, then most encounters are winnable fairly easily. Thing is, 3e monsters vs parties were so tight that it's a very fine line between a cakewalk and dead PC's. The monsters didn't scale very well. AD&D isn't really a problem since monsters in combat, outside of save or die, were individually so weak. 3e, OTOH, was a much different animal. 4e is different again in that it makes the monster math 100% visible to the DM. A level X monster can do Y to Z damage. Raise the level of the monster and the damage scales. I honestly think what people are really reacting to is the transparency of 4e. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Pros and Cons of going mainstream
Top