Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HJFudge" data-source="post: 7617316" data-attributes="member: 6997593">My biggest complaint about 4e was how difficult it was to use TotM to run. It was far, far better as a game if you used at least a battlemap. So those people who love TotM? I totally get why they didn't get into 4e. Could it be done? Sure. But it wasnt easy.However, 4e is also my favorite addition to play a non-spell casting class. In fact, whenever I play 5e I ensure I play a casting class because otherwise...well, what am I going to do in a combat encounter? Im going to say "I hit it with my sword/axe/whatever" 95% of the time. And even casters, at lower levels, seem to be just 'spam the damaging cantrip'. This makes combat something I avoid whenever possible...because its not fun.Now, a lot of people talk about how 4e was all about combat. And I confess, when I played and ran 4e, there were far more combat encounters and far more time was spent on them than other editions. Not because non-combat encounters were bad under the system, or because 4e hindered roleplay...but because finally combat was actually fun. It was a joy to play. Each turn I had to work with my party and make decisions and pay attention! To some this is a con, if you just plain don't like combat at all in any edition or if you aren't there to pay attention.As for creative solutions, I had just as many in 4e given to me by my players as I do when I run 5e. They are neither better nor worse, there really isnt a difference. In 4e it was a tad easier for me to adjudicate but then I was far more experienced with 4e than I am with 5e.But there has been too many people who have reported vastly different experiences to me that I can't really honestly say all of them are just making it up. However, it does make me curious WHY there is such a huge discrepency. What was I doing wrong/right at my table? Were my players just gods amongst men creatively? In retrospect....no. No they were not lol. So what was it? Why was my table full of interesting, creative roleplay and combat solutions that didnt involve all powers in 4e and so many others were not? Was it that I had more rulebooks? Was I simply less burdened with expectations...as I mostly did AD&D and 2e, I didnt play much 3/3.5? It just makes me very curious. As I read these replies...and they are reasoned, well thought out, believable...but they fly in the face of the personal experiences I've had with the edition. And I have run it recently(ish)...though I now run 13th Age almost exclusively as it allows for far better TotM. So what gives guys? Did I just read a rule wrong that allowed me to experience 4e in some idealized glory mode?</blockquote>

Verification