Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7637749" data-attributes="member: 996">I ran 4e, for the run of Encounters (and beyond, but with an established group), so that's a /lot/ of introducing the game to brand-new players.&nbsp; Something I'd done back in the day, and done, since, as Encounters opened up to the Next playtest, then 5e. 4e is /easily/ the most accessible of the WotC editions, to brand-new players.&nbsp; Now, sure, you /could/ do 30-level builds if you were so inclined, but it wasn't /necessary/, you could just pick whatever looked cool each level, and you'd be fine, you could build highly-customized build-to-concept, highly optimized, or just obvious/intuitive and you'd have a comparatively viable character.&nbsp; The rewards for system mastery were just marginal.&nbsp; In 3.5 it was &quot;necessary,&quot; to generally be on roughly the same system-mastery page, preferably similar-Tier classes, if you wanted a fully-participatory campaign, and if that page as PvP or CharOP, genuinely necessary to go full-on optimization - but if that page showed more restraint &amp; was core only, or if it was E6, such optimization was not necessary, at all.In 5e, it's simply not possible to build characters to that level of customization or optimization, because the options aren't there.&nbsp; It is.&nbsp; It is a slight to 5e and it's goal of 'big tent' inclusion of fans of all past editions.&nbsp; (And the idea of 'tactical richness' as defining 4e is also a bit of faint praise, since it was also the only version of D&amp;D to at least /try/ to cover out-of-combat in a functional full-party-participation way, that was weighted the same as combat. Yes, 4e got away from 3.5 'static combats' - but that was far from the only thing it did.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7637749, member: 996"] I ran 4e, for the run of Encounters (and beyond, but with an established group), so that's a /lot/ of introducing the game to brand-new players. Something I'd done back in the day, and done, since, as Encounters opened up to the Next playtest, then 5e. 4e is /easily/ the most accessible of the WotC editions, to brand-new players. Now, sure, you /could/ do 30-level builds if you were so inclined, but it wasn't /necessary/, you could just pick whatever looked cool each level, and you'd be fine, you could build highly-customized build-to-concept, highly optimized, or just obvious/intuitive and you'd have a comparatively viable character. The rewards for system mastery were just marginal. In 3.5 it was "necessary," to generally be on roughly the same system-mastery page, preferably similar-Tier classes, if you wanted a fully-participatory campaign, and if that page as PvP or CharOP, genuinely necessary to go full-on optimization - but if that page showed more restraint & was core only, or if it was E6, such optimization was not necessary, at all. In 5e, it's simply not possible to build characters to that level of customization or optimization, because the options aren't there. It is. It is a slight to 5e and it's goal of 'big tent' inclusion of fans of all past editions. (And the idea of 'tactical richness' as defining 4e is also a bit of faint praise, since it was also the only version of D&D to at least /try/ to cover out-of-combat in a functional full-party-participation way, that was weighted the same as combat. Yes, 4e got away from 3.5 'static combats' - but that was far from the only thing it did.) [/QUOTE]

Verification