Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 6556356" data-attributes="member: 6790260">I...yes, I get that. That would be why I used the phrase &quot;design decisions.&quot;See, the problem here is not that a problem has been solved: it is that a pendulum has swung back to the other extreme, leaving the middle feeling very excluded. I freely admit that 4e (at least prior to the Essentials line) normalized everyone to a level of complexity that wasn't great for some players--but, for other players, it was just as you put it, &quot;refreshing,&quot; because you could finally play a character with the &quot;fights with grit and strength and skill at arms&quot; archetype and have significant mechanical depth behind it.5e is, thus, as I said, a step back or sideways. It completely dispensed with the good part of what 4e brought in this narrow sense--that is, &quot;martial&quot; characters with significant mechanical bits and bobs--and wholly switched over to &quot;simple&quot; martial characters again. Which D&amp;D has done for pretty much every edition since it began. The actual &quot;solved this problem&quot; state would be one where there is a range of complexities for all classes, which the devs advertised quite openly at first and then slowly and steadily backed away from until 5e ended up being just like 3e and those before it: the most vastly complex Fighter you can build is still strictly less complex than the least complex Wizard, Druid, or Cleric.For people who just want to blast away and not fiddle about with spells, and for people who want to play a &quot;master of battle tactics&quot; that actually engages their thinking caps, the very thing that is your &quot;refreshment&quot; is their &quot;ah well, it was nice being included for a while.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 6556356, member: 6790260"] I...yes, I get that. That would be why I used the phrase "design decisions." See, the problem here is not that a problem has been solved: it is that a pendulum has swung back to the other extreme, leaving the middle feeling very excluded. I freely admit that 4e (at least prior to the Essentials line) normalized everyone to a level of complexity that wasn't great for some players--but, for other players, it was just as you put it, "refreshing," because you could [I]finally[/I] play a character with the "fights with grit and strength and skill at arms" archetype [I]and have significant mechanical depth behind it.[/I] 5e is, thus, as I said, a step back or sideways. It completely dispensed with the good part of what 4e brought in this narrow sense--that is, "martial" characters with significant mechanical bits and bobs--and wholly switched over to "simple" martial characters again. Which D&D has done for pretty much every edition since it began. The actual "solved this problem" state would be one where there is a range of complexities for [I]all[/I] classes, which the devs advertised quite openly at first and then slowly and steadily backed away from until 5e ended up being just like 3e and those before it: the most vastly complex Fighter you can build is still strictly less complex than the least complex Wizard, Druid, or Cleric. For people who just want to blast away and not fiddle about with spells, and for people who want to play a "master of battle tactics" that actually engages their thinking caps, the very thing that is your "refreshment" is their "ah well, it was nice being included for a while." [/QUOTE]

Verification