D&D 5E Sell 5th edition to a 4th edition fan...

[Remathilis]

So you mean in 5e encounters are usually built so your typical Instance of a Group to, say, encounter a Dungeon should have 1 character to Tank, 1 character to act as the primary Healer, and somewhere between 2-4 (let's say 3 for the sake of average) random people to help keep up Damage on the enemies?

Nah, that's crazy-talk. Nobody in their right mind could operate a successful game doing that.

- Marty Lund

The thing is, in 5e the druid or paladin could be the healer, the barbarian or ranger can tank, the fighter could be a archer-sniper, and the wizard could focus on in-your-face evocation damage. In 4e, each is acting out of role and therefore is ineffective (if not outright punished) for doing so.

Descriptive roles allow flexibility, Prescriptive roles demand certain classes fill certain roles for maximum effectiveness.

 

[Dour-n-Taciturn]

Our group is still at Epic level in 4th Ed. Some of the group have dabbled in 5th, and the reviews were mixed, albeit with limited play at lower levels. I have yet to indulge, but what I've read so far is promising; there is a thread on the Warlock (which I'm currently playing: Vestige-Infernal pact), which is a class I'd likely reprise if we ever did change editions, maybe Cleric since I'm partial to Dwarves...

 

[Neonchameleon]

The thing is, in 5e the druid or paladin could be the healer, the barbarian or ranger can tank, the fighter could be a archer-sniper, and the wizard could focus on in-your-face evocation damage. In 4e, each is acting out of role and therefore is ineffective (if not outright punished) for doing so.

Descriptive roles allow flexibility, Prescriptive roles demand certain classes fill certain roles for maximum effectiveness.

The thing is that in 5e a healer is necessary. In 4e a leader is not - and a Paladin is a more than good enough healer.
The thing is that a 4e Barbarian makes a better tank than just about any 5e class due to the different way Opportunity Attacks work.
The thing is that in 4e you can have an archer/sniper easily enough as long as you give up the need to write fighter on the top of your character sheet. In 5e you can not play a Warlord worthy of the name without entirely homebrewing the class.
The thing is that if you think a 4e wizard can't do in your face damage you're relying on just the very earliest books; a Pyromancer/Evoker is scary.
The thing is that you can provide emergency in combat hit point restoration from the fighter in 4e by a number of means. Acting out of role is easier in 4e than in literally any other edition of D&D unless you're playing a 3.X CoDzilla.

The D&Ds with roles that you must fill are those other than 4e where people need to play the healer or the game assumptions break. This isn't about descriptive or prescriptive roles - it's about the pacing of the game itself.

 

[TrippyHippy]

The thing is that in 5e a healer is necessary.

Not if you use the Healing Surge rules from the 5E DMG (p266) - where all PCs can heal up to half their total HD (+Con mods to each die) in between short rests which can also be as low as 5 minutes long if you choose that option too.

I can’t be bothered to work out the rest, but this is the third time you have ignored that stated optional rule being pointed out to you. Read the DMG!

 

[Neonchameleon]

Not if you use the Healing Surge rules from the 5E DMG (p266) - where all PCs can heal up to half their total HD (+Con mods to each die) in between short rests which can also be as low as 5 minutes long if you choose that option too.

I can’t be bothered to work out the rest, but this is the third time you have ignored that stated optional rule being pointed out to you. Read the DMG!

Of course I ignore optional rules. Optional rules have little more validity than common house rules - they are irrelevant for almost all campaigns out there. It is very easy to house rule D&D in any edition so all hit points are automatically recovered after every single fight. This is a choice that is entirely in the hands of the DM and is one that will be made by relatively few DMs.

In 4e the players can elect to go in without a cleric. In 5e the players can work without a cleric if and only if the DM uses the optional rule presented in the DMG. This is simply the new version of the Oberoni Fallacy - that optional rules fix a core problem with the game simply demonstrates that the core game is flawed.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Of course I ignore optional rules.

The inherent advantage of 5E, indeed the whole point of it’s core design brief, was to build a game flexible enough to suite all tastes. The solution is provided for you in official text, and yet you still complain about it because it’s only an option? It’s not a house rule - it’s allowing you, the DM, to build the rules the way you like them.

You can build a 4E style game out of 5E, by actually reading the DMG and choosing your options, but you can’t do the reverse with 4E for any other style.

Would you only be happy if all gamers were forced to play in the One True Way that is 4E?

 

[Neonchameleon]

Then what is the point in arguing with you - if you’re going to ignore the inherent advantage of 5E which is to build a game flexible enough to suite all tastes? The solution is provided for you in official text, and yet you still complain about it?

5e is no easier to houserule than any other edition so far as I can tell. And I don't know what the point in you arguing is if you are going to work on the basis of 5e being either Schrodinger's Rules in which you always use your perfect set of options, or on the basis of it being an unfinished game that the DM needs to complete.

And the solution you offer (house ruling using an optional rule) has a number of drawbacks. If you run with no healer in 4e it changes the tone of the game to something more brutal and with less margin for error - but the adventures all still work. In 5e you need active DM intervention - either the players need to go to the DM in advance and say "No one wants to play the healer. Please throw us softballs by changing the healing rules", the DM needs to make the conscious decision to throw softballs by changing the healing rules, or the DM needs to change the healing rules in advance which shifts the game balance. In 4e if you have no leader in the group you just suck it up without it being a situation where the DM actively changes the rules of the world to suit the party, making it feel that much more artificial.

All you are doing by offering optional rules is presenting a twist on the Oberoni Fallacy.

 

[TrippyHippy]

5e is no easier to houserule than any other edition so far as I can tell.

Evidently it is, but you’ve already got such a closed mind on the subject that you can’t be bothered reading it or even accept stated text that describes precisely the options you are looking for. All you want to do is argue against whatever it says, regardless.

As such, as mentioned in my message way back, what is the point of actually trying to ‘sell’ you anything if you’ve already made up your mind?

EDIT: I’m not sure you read my edited text in my last post before you texted your response - so I’m going refer you back to that post also.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Evidently it is,

What do you mean "Evidently it is"? Where's your evidence? (Personally I'd say it isn't even close to as easy to houserule as oD&D or BD&D - there are far more moving parts).

but you’ve already got such a closed mind on the subject that you can’t be bothered reading it or even accept stated text that describes precisely the options you are looking for. All you want to do is argue against whatever it says, regardless.

This is entirely your projection. As I said "There are options presented here" is almost indistinguishable from "Here is a house rule to fix it". Which doesn't mean that it doesn't need fixing. It means that a good DM who knows about the problem in advance can play game designer to try to fix the inherent problems of the game.

As such, as mentioned in my message way back, what is the point of actually trying to ‘sell’ you anything if you’ve already made up your mind?

I'm not the person who opened this thread. I'm also not the 4e fan you were trying to sell on 5e by presenting insulting rubbish about 4e such as implying you couldn't roleplay in 4e. I've tried 5e and found it lukewarm and mediocre. You, however, are apparently trying to sell both the thread starter on this thread and the person you know in real life. The way you are trying will fail miserably.

 

[TrippyHippy]

What do you mean "Evidently it is"? Where's your evidence? (Personally I'd say it isn't even close to as easy to houserule as oD&D or BD&D - there are far more moving parts).



This is entirely your projection. As I said "There are options presented here" is almost indistinguishable from "Here is a house rule to fix it". Which doesn't mean that it doesn't need fixing. It means that a good DM who knows about the problem in advance can play game designer to try to fix the inherent problems of the game.



I'm not the person who opened this thread. I'm also not the 4e fan you were trying to sell on 5e by presenting insulting rubbish about 4e such as implying you couldn't roleplay in 4e. I've tried 5e and found it lukewarm and mediocre. You, however, are apparently trying to sell both the thread starter on this thread and the person you know in real life. The way you are trying will fail miserably.

Again, I am going to refer you to previous posts. Indeed, I’ll quote the salient one back to you again:

The inherent advantage of 5E, indeed the whole point of it’s core design brief, was to build a game flexible enough to suite all tastes. The solution is provided for you in official text, and yet you still complain about it because it’s only an option? It’s not a house rule - it’s allowing you, the DM, to build the rules the way you like them.

You can build a 4E style game out of 5E, by actually reading the DMG and choosing your options, but you can’t do the reverse with 4E for any other style.

Would you only be happy if all gamers were forced to play in the One True Way that is 4E?