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: 7148654" data-attributes="member: 996">Sure.  I think he may have said as much at some point.  As much a d20 game as it is, 5e does seem to cater more to the expectations of players of the classic game.  And, sure, the way it leans heavily on the DM is contrary to the 'RAW' expectations of the 3.x community.OTOH, the DM-led variable-resting solution he's championing is very much at odds with that RAW emphasis, and, IMHO, in keeping with the spirit of 5e's DM Empowerment, and could shore up 5e's encounter guidelines.  So that's... interesting.  Maybe the designers had a little trouble extricating themselves from some 3.x era preconceptions, too? Certainly 5e was conceived with the idea of being true to past editions, particularly the classic TSR editions, and to those tropes shared by all editions.  It very different from the other WotC editions in being DM-focused, DM-empowering, and depending very much upon the judgment of the DM, rather than focusing on players' options - and the idea of the DM exercising judgment when it comes to whether resting is possible and how long it might take, seems very consistent with what it is. I wouldn't think so, no.  There was some of that 'rules lawyering' back in the day, certainly, but the whole RAW/'rewards for system mastery' paradigm was very much a 3e thing.   Ironically, I suppose 5e should have some 'module' where the DM commits to catering to that kind of behavior, in the name of being 'for' fans of 3.x, as well as those of the other editions.</blockquote>

Verification