Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
The Best Thing from 4E
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6578858" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>5e is more regression than evolution. </p><p></p><p></p><p>The people who published the HPE series of modules definitely did NOT understand 4e, or they deliberately published a bunch of adventures greatly at variance with their understanding, assuming they did understand it. You can put it how you want, but the evidence still stands there. Those modules were terrible examples of how to run 4e, just terrible. What evidence do you have that they DID understand how to write for 4e and consequently what kind of play it was suited for? </p><p></p><p></p><p>Your argument is a huge excluded-middle. Nothing is so simple. 3e mechanically had become moribund and vastly difficult to write for. Its classes didn't work well at all, it had myriad issues. If they were going to go on and continue to publish, then yeah, a new edition made good sense. It gave them a chance to internalize the lessons of 3e and try to build on what worked and change what didn't. </p><p></p><p>Whenever you design something complex, you never know exactly what you will get. Certainly not in any kind of creative field. So I can't say what WotC AIMED FOR with 4e, I can only say what they did get. What they got has some great strengths which I, and many others, have been able to leverage into some great games. </p><p></p><p>Many more things could be done with 4e, yes. I think many of the issues that people had were perceptual and presentation issues, and that there was beyond that plenty of room to adjust and improve elements of the game to address objections people had, without requiring a large rewrite. Essentials in and of itself isn't bad, but it was just a distraction. It didn't really address what needed addressing. It was an attempt to make a less 4e-like 4e. Instead what should have happened was to bring the system's real strengths more to the front.</p><p></p><p></p><p>No, I'm saying that a lot of those things can be addressed within the context of 4e, starting over and regressing back to a game that has an only goal of emulating 2e wasn't my idea of the best answer.</p><p></p><p>I've never seen such a quote. I am simply presenting the evidence of what you can do with 4e, and when I did it, in a way somewhat similar to how Chris did it, I didn't find it to be some huge amount of work. My experience was that the system HELPED ME vastly, it was on my side, making my life easy. What I'd like to say to Chris would simply be "well, you couldn't have created that campaign using any other edition, could you?" And that's kind of a final word on that, 4e brings something unique to the game, something 5e does not bring to the table.</p><p></p><p></p><p>The problem with 3e is that its whole class-system is its problem. So you have to go back and totally rework that, at which point you're stripped down to the core of a d20 engine. 4e then made a couple nice, but relatively minor, tweaks on that engine and built a whole new class structure etc on top of that. The skill system has to go too, BTW. So, yeah, you could start with 3e and do it, but you'd have to end up with essentially something pretty close to 4e if you were going to capture what 4e was good for, and 5e doesn't do that. I don't really have a big issue with 5e either, for what it is, but what it is is a rehash of 2e, straight up. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, clearly it has some quite different mechanics. Most of them were tried out in 3.5 at some point, but... </p><p></p><p>I would just like to say about 3.5 though, that IME its even HARDER to make it work. You really have to have a group that expends significant effort on avoiding the bad issues of 3.5 and it too is not exactly easy to get many playstyles out of. While its mechanics resemble those of 'classic' D&D to a greater degree, it really is a VERY different game, once you get past about level 3. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think that's really the same thing. They might well have understood that Orcus was an uninteresting brick, but if they didn't know what the system was good for they didn't know how to make something better, say MM3's Lolth, which is vastly superior to Orcus. Even Lolth still misses the boat by a little bit though. What Chris 'got' was the action part of the equation. The game is really great when you take the restraints off and think big and crazy. Its a system for doing larger-than-life fantasy, with lots of action and high stakes.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Thanks, now I have a line of tap dancing skeletons on my mind... lol.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think WotC's problem is that there's no 'right move' for them at this point. They committed errors at multiple levels across a span of years and now they're sleeping in the bed of their own making.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah, I'm quite clear about the things that make 4e suitable for my preferred style of DMing. I've played 5e, it isn't 4e and it isn't doing what 4e does. If I wanted to go back in time and pretend I was me circa 1992 and run my old 2e campaign? 5e would be perfect for that! To run my current 4e campaign? No amount of house ruling that didn't amount to a near-total rewrite would get me there. I'd have to write new classes, a new magic system, a new healing system, etc. I'd still not have the 4e monsters and such things, I'd have to port every monster or rewrite many of them. I can't see the point.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 6578858, member: 82106"] 5e is more regression than evolution. The people who published the HPE series of modules definitely did NOT understand 4e, or they deliberately published a bunch of adventures greatly at variance with their understanding, assuming they did understand it. You can put it how you want, but the evidence still stands there. Those modules were terrible examples of how to run 4e, just terrible. What evidence do you have that they DID understand how to write for 4e and consequently what kind of play it was suited for? Your argument is a huge excluded-middle. Nothing is so simple. 3e mechanically had become moribund and vastly difficult to write for. Its classes didn't work well at all, it had myriad issues. If they were going to go on and continue to publish, then yeah, a new edition made good sense. It gave them a chance to internalize the lessons of 3e and try to build on what worked and change what didn't. Whenever you design something complex, you never know exactly what you will get. Certainly not in any kind of creative field. So I can't say what WotC AIMED FOR with 4e, I can only say what they did get. What they got has some great strengths which I, and many others, have been able to leverage into some great games. Many more things could be done with 4e, yes. I think many of the issues that people had were perceptual and presentation issues, and that there was beyond that plenty of room to adjust and improve elements of the game to address objections people had, without requiring a large rewrite. Essentials in and of itself isn't bad, but it was just a distraction. It didn't really address what needed addressing. It was an attempt to make a less 4e-like 4e. Instead what should have happened was to bring the system's real strengths more to the front. No, I'm saying that a lot of those things can be addressed within the context of 4e, starting over and regressing back to a game that has an only goal of emulating 2e wasn't my idea of the best answer. I've never seen such a quote. I am simply presenting the evidence of what you can do with 4e, and when I did it, in a way somewhat similar to how Chris did it, I didn't find it to be some huge amount of work. My experience was that the system HELPED ME vastly, it was on my side, making my life easy. What I'd like to say to Chris would simply be "well, you couldn't have created that campaign using any other edition, could you?" And that's kind of a final word on that, 4e brings something unique to the game, something 5e does not bring to the table. The problem with 3e is that its whole class-system is its problem. So you have to go back and totally rework that, at which point you're stripped down to the core of a d20 engine. 4e then made a couple nice, but relatively minor, tweaks on that engine and built a whole new class structure etc on top of that. The skill system has to go too, BTW. So, yeah, you could start with 3e and do it, but you'd have to end up with essentially something pretty close to 4e if you were going to capture what 4e was good for, and 5e doesn't do that. I don't really have a big issue with 5e either, for what it is, but what it is is a rehash of 2e, straight up. Well, clearly it has some quite different mechanics. Most of them were tried out in 3.5 at some point, but... I would just like to say about 3.5 though, that IME its even HARDER to make it work. You really have to have a group that expends significant effort on avoiding the bad issues of 3.5 and it too is not exactly easy to get many playstyles out of. While its mechanics resemble those of 'classic' D&D to a greater degree, it really is a VERY different game, once you get past about level 3. I don't think that's really the same thing. They might well have understood that Orcus was an uninteresting brick, but if they didn't know what the system was good for they didn't know how to make something better, say MM3's Lolth, which is vastly superior to Orcus. Even Lolth still misses the boat by a little bit though. What Chris 'got' was the action part of the equation. The game is really great when you take the restraints off and think big and crazy. Its a system for doing larger-than-life fantasy, with lots of action and high stakes. Thanks, now I have a line of tap dancing skeletons on my mind... lol.:lol: I think WotC's problem is that there's no 'right move' for them at this point. They committed errors at multiple levels across a span of years and now they're sleeping in the bed of their own making. Yeah, I'm quite clear about the things that make 4e suitable for my preferred style of DMing. I've played 5e, it isn't 4e and it isn't doing what 4e does. If I wanted to go back in time and pretend I was me circa 1992 and run my old 2e campaign? 5e would be perfect for that! To run my current 4e campaign? No amount of house ruling that didn't amount to a near-total rewrite would get me there. I'd have to write new classes, a new magic system, a new healing system, etc. I'd still not have the 4e monsters and such things, I'd have to port every monster or rewrite many of them. I can't see the point. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
The Best Thing from 4E
Top