Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 7169631" data-attributes="member: 6778044">Well, to be fair, I think that's also what the majority of D&D players felt when 4e came out.I wasn't around here for the edition wars, and while there are a lot of things I don't personally like about 4e, I think it's an incredibly well designed game. Just not the game I want to play, unfortunately. It's not that I couldn't make it the game I wanted to play, it's just that it would have taken a lot more work than ever before. And there wasn't really a need, since I already had the game I wanted to play.The fact that 5e is a "return to form" I think could reasonably have been expected, with the sales numbers, the sales numbers of Pathfinder, and the general sentiment that seemed to have been out there at the time. Of course, for the folks that started with 4e, it doesn't matter, this is as drastic a change as 4e was to the rest of us.Having said that, I'm glad that D&D went through 4e. If they had tried to remain closer to the history of the game at that time, I don't think we would have gotten anything nearly as elegant and simple as 5e, despite its flaws. It's not perfect, but I think this would have received a lot of negativity from the 3e players if this was 4e too. I'm not so sure it would have been seen as a step forward.I would be interested in knowing what you had in 4e that you feel is missing in 5e. Obviously they're quite different, but I don't know 4e well enough to hazard a guess, and everybody has their own favorite parts of any ruleset anyway.</blockquote>

Verification