Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 5976300" data-attributes="member: 6688937">I agree that there's a big difference, but looking at 4e, I think its obvious that those influences weren't equal. Personally, I feel the influence of Euro games and Indie rpgs is so minimal as to be academic.The real problem, I think, is that they took too much in the way of mechanics, without looking at adapting other material. I know I lose grognard points whenever I say it, but I think its more important for 5e to be able to handle Airbenders and Jedi than it is for it to handle hobbits and polearms. They may or may not have done a terrible job, but I don't see how any of those points are problematic for a game where they intend the computer to do the accounting for you. To me, it looked like they were trying to leverage some of their design experience from Magic and use it for an rpg. I mean, really, the powers lists bear a stunning resemblance to a cardlist, as do the wordings of powers. Heck, didn't they even produce decks of the powers? Given that they intended the DM to still be scripting/running the adventure, the important thing would be to make sure everything fit the power structure in a way that could be implemented easily online. I think they succeeded in that. The constant condition toggling, tracking marks, triggered reactions, all would get easier if a computer is doing the accounting for you. The flavor or fluff, is just the graphics that happen on screen.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ratskinner, post: 5976300, member: 6688937"] I agree that there's a big difference, but looking at 4e, I think its obvious that those influences weren't equal. Personally, I feel the influence of Euro games and Indie rpgs is so minimal as to be academic. The real problem, I think, is that they took too much in the way of mechanics, without looking at adapting other material. I know I lose grognard points whenever I say it, but I think its more important for 5e to be able to handle Airbenders and Jedi than it is for it to handle hobbits and polearms. They may or may not have done a terrible job, but I don't see how any of those points are problematic for a game where they intend the computer to do the accounting for you. To me, it looked like they were trying to leverage some of their design experience from Magic and use it for an rpg. I mean, really, the powers lists bear a stunning resemblance to a cardlist, as do the wordings of powers. Heck, didn't they even produce decks of the powers? Given that they intended the DM to still be scripting/running the adventure, the important thing would be to make sure everything fit the power structure in a way that could be implemented easily online. I think they succeeded in that. The constant condition toggling, tracking marks, triggered reactions, all would get easier if a computer is doing the accounting for you. The flavor or fluff, is just the graphics that happen on screen. [/QUOTE]

Verification