Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 5799518" data-attributes="member: 463">While I agree re 15MAD, I'm not sure it's true that 4e is more flexible than 3e in general and overall.  It depends on what you're trying to do with the system. There are certainly things 3e seems to accommodate better than 4e, like a variable level party - though 1e does that much better. If you want short but tense battles, that is really hard to do in 4e, whereas 3e does it easily; 1e does it at low level. I was discussing with a new GM recently her plan for a campaign concerning the ingress of iron into a bronze-age world, with a heavy focus on the faerie and their dislike of iron.  She wanted to use 4e but was concerned it wouldn't work well for what she wanted.4e also makes exploration-based play difficult, especially in shorter game sessions.  Trivial encounters work very poorly.  The whole Tyranny of Fun thing can be problematic for a more 1e dungeoncrawl type style.  Immersive simulation can be difficult, the system doesn't really encourage it due to often disasociated mechanics.Overall I like 4e and find it a useful tool for much of what I typically want from a game, but like 3e it's a limited tool.  1e has its issues too - just as 4e mechanics don't support simulation, 1e mechanics don't give much inherent support to making combat exciting; with 1e you can never just 'rest on the mechanics'. Plus IME the 1e GM needs to be constantly making ad hoc rulings, almost building his own game.  I like that, some people don't.So, all different games, all have their own strengths and limitations.</blockquote>

Verification