Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ZombieRoboNinja" data-source="post: 5976506" data-attributes="member: 54843">Personally, I saw the &quot;power card&quot; structure of 4e as well-suited for a card environment, like the one that made WOTC rich in the first place, and hey look! They actually did print up cards for 4e. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Anyway, I think 4e took some good and even necessary steps in modernizing the design of D&amp;D. 3e pretty clearly had a LOT carried over from the TSR days, for legacy appeal or just because WOTC really didn't have the time and resources to reinvent 100 pages of wizard/cleric spells on top of a bunch of new feats and skills. 4e was a definitive answer to the question: what happens when you try to build D&amp;D from the ground up with a top-notch design team? Unlike the 70s, we now have a multi-billion-dollar industry out there centered around creating fun and addictive gameplay mechanics; it would be ludicrous to think a few creative guys 30 years ago nailed it down so perfectly we shouldn't look to the games industry for improvements.But Mearls is also right that keeping tabletop gaming alive means highlighting the benefits of tabletop OVER video games. If I want to play a game with friends on my computer, Blizzard has got me covered; I'm playing D&amp;D because I want to get my eyes off a monitor for a while, and because I want to focus on the free-form narrative elements that a video game can't do.Ideally, 5e will combine these concerns: it'll be a smoothly-designed game that is simple to learn, compelling to play, and free enough that my imagination (rather than a spreadsheet) is always at the forefront of my playing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ZombieRoboNinja, post: 5976506, member: 54843"] Personally, I saw the "power card" structure of 4e as well-suited for a card environment, like the one that made WOTC rich in the first place, and hey look! They actually did print up cards for 4e. ;) Anyway, I think 4e took some good and even necessary steps in modernizing the design of D&D. 3e pretty clearly had a LOT carried over from the TSR days, for legacy appeal or just because WOTC really didn't have the time and resources to reinvent 100 pages of wizard/cleric spells on top of a bunch of new feats and skills. 4e was a definitive answer to the question: what happens when you try to build D&D from the ground up with a top-notch design team? Unlike the 70s, we now have a multi-billion-dollar industry out there centered around creating fun and addictive gameplay mechanics; it would be ludicrous to think a few creative guys 30 years ago nailed it down so perfectly we shouldn't look to the games industry for improvements. But Mearls is also right that keeping tabletop gaming alive means highlighting the benefits of tabletop OVER video games. If I want to play a game with friends on my computer, Blizzard has got me covered; I'm playing D&D because I want to get my eyes off a monitor for a while, and because I want to focus on the free-form narrative elements that a video game can't do. Ideally, 5e will combine these concerns: it'll be a smoothly-designed game that is simple to learn, compelling to play, and free enough that my imagination (rather than a spreadsheet) is always at the forefront of my playing. [/QUOTE]

Verification