Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sadras" data-source="post: 6575027" data-attributes="member: 6688277">Fair enough this is your position on the matter, but there were also 4e players that agreed with the sentiment that 4e had WoW/video-gamey qualities. <a href="http://dreadgazebo.net/4e-plays-like-a-video-game/" target="_blank">http://dreadgazebo.net/4e-plays-like-a-video-game/</a>But to each their own. Considering that my post largely dealt with how much of 4e exists within 5e, your above quote doesn't make much sense.So your prediction on 5e would be that it didn't change enough so will die quicker than 4e? You're ready to make that statement now?Yes. In my humble opinion, WotC. Please note, I'm not saying that a lot of great ideas were not explored with the design of 4e, I'm only speaking to a large fracture being created within our community on the levels that the previous editions never created.I believe the attempt with 5e was to heal the fracture. Sadly you do not see it that way. Also your suggestion seems to have them compete with Rob Heinsoo's 4e baby 13th Age by sticking to the 4e way and as far as I can see based on posters on Enworld that many were not happy with the simplitic attitude of Essentials. I think revision/consolidation of ideas was very much needed.From my perspective 4e was not as flexible as any of the other editions, it was a closed system. The DDI character builder was horrible in terms of customization, IMO.What agenda are you referring to here?True, in 5e there is no epic play in the same style of 4e - however 4e did not seem to include a great many styles of play, hence the reason for the fractured community. Which game is more inclusive, one which excludes one epic style of play or one which excludes a great many styles of play. No Orcus, but Tiamat is available. The point being that a 4e mechanic has been included within 5e.There are mixed reports on survivability regarding Venomfang. I prefer that. As for the Wizard being balanced with the rest of the characters - he has always been more flexible in every edition - as for greatest damage dealer, I'm not convinced on that.  Yeah I see this, but I'm not convinced. IMO, 5e improved grid play by removing all the grindy-4e mechanisms (conditions and reactions).Another view point being it made it samey and bland. You push two squares, he pulls two squares, he slides away two squares and he affects two squares.You hold his hand, he holds your hand, you hold your hands together and on a miss you grasp each others hand. I think its more a consolidation of ideas over the last 4 editions. Does it lack a couple of aspects from previous editions that we might like, sure - but it caters to more styles across the board. 4e was innovative, but it felt like a pushy selfish edition - stating "this is the way you MUST play"Personally the signpost of 5e is more along the lines of "this is some of the better and more popular ideas of D&D over the course of its life, some variants are included for the different playstyles, do with the system what you will"Honestly, what where the variant options available in 4e? Off the top of my head I can only think of the Inherent System and Page 42, I'm sure there were more but I cannot recall them right now.</blockquote>

Verification