D&D 4E The "4E Crowd" - where will they go? What will they play?

I've played 800+ hours of 4e; taken a group from 18 (converted from 13ish 3.5 characters) through to 30 as DM in a home game, played and run countless LFR. It seems very unlikely I'll adopt 5e as it does not seem to have a strong design coherence -- it's hard to see it as more than just a bunch of stuff a committee of people thought might work, and it seems unable to keep the basics clean, consistent and coherent.

13th Age is an excellent candidate for me. I know the concept of a fighter deciding to try a certain attack and then, half-way through, realizing it wasn't going to work and doing something different is a little hard for trained D&D players to cope with, but it works for me. I've fought enough in martial arts rings to realize that unless your actions are running in 0.5 second rounds, this reflects reality much better than the very simplistic "for the next six seconds I will try and do move X and NOT TRY ANYTHING ELSE".

Savage Worlds is probably my next best candidate system. But very different.

I just cannot do 3E anymore. It's too painful at high levels, and the vast effectiveness difference between optimal builds and fun builds even at medium levels is just too annoying. Not for me anymore.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mircoles

Explorer
Over all I'd say that I qualify as a serious gamer, even though currently I'm not gaming because no gaming is better than bad gaming and my weekly schedule sucks currently.

Game-wise I'm likely switching to Savage worlds, though with some modifications to it.
It's by far the most malleable system out there and multigenre. It's very easy to learn and to teach to others. It has a very good fantasy campaign setting with the Hellfrost supplements.
 

Moon_Goddess

Have I really been on this site for over 20 years!
I agree to an extent, but the way I see it is that if 5E really is modular with this so-called complexity dial, then most of the folks who want the mechanics of 4E (which, in terms of differences from other editions, boils down to AEDU - at least in terms of what makes it really distinct) will just play 5E with the "AEDU option."

To me, I feel like Defender, Striker, Controller, Leader and all that comes with it especially marking is far far more important to me than AEDU. And I really don't see how you can have a module that does that.
 

Lord Shark

Adventurer
To me, I feel like Defender, Striker, Controller, Leader and all that comes with it especially marking is far far more important to me than AEDU. And I really don't see how you can have a module that does that.

Yes. I don't think the AEDU structure is as important as what it enables -- the transparency and balance between classes, and the ability of all players to do cool stuff without having to jawbone the DM to allow it. If 5E didn't use AEDU but still enabled that kind of play, I would be cool with it. Since it apparently won't, I don't think I'll be moving on to the new edition. (I do still play 3.5/Pathfinder as well, but I'll never DM it again.)
 

Pog

First Post
I'm not sure this thread is very encouraging ... Just by a quick skim it seems that dnd is going to be more split than ever ...
 

Randomthoughts

Adventurer
I think it'll depend on how similar 5e is with 4e. I don't see a lot of similarities yet (and the underlying math chassis is different for sure), but there should be modules that may make it more enticing. I'm taking a "wait and see" approach (besides participating in playtests when I can).
 
Last edited:

I'm not sure this thread is very encouraging ... Just by a quick skim it seems that dnd is going to be more split than ever ...

This is a surprise?

standards.png
 

Remove ads

Top