Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="James Gasik" data-source="post: 8570550" data-attributes="member: 6877472">&quot;Worse&quot; is a value judgement that can only be demonstrably proven by consensus (that is to say, what more people find better/easier to use).&nbsp; Most people think that Base Attack Bonus, for example, is superior to Thac0 or the older attack matrices.&nbsp; But there is, and will always be disagreement on that point.&nbsp; Certainly, some older systems were not streamlined or concise, and sometimes confusing.&nbsp; Many subsystems that required percentage rolls, for example, were phased out in order to streamline the game and make it's rules easier to digest.I think the proper term we should use is &quot;familiar&quot;.&nbsp; If the 3.5 XPH system is more familiar to more players than the 1e system found in the Appendices or the 2e system found in the CPH, that will probably be the system used as the foundation for a newer system because it is more familiar to a broader audience.The purpose of 5e was to &quot;bring everyone along for the ride&quot;.&nbsp; I think Move, Minor, Standard was a better system than &quot;so you can move but it's not really an action, just a thing you do, and you can take an action.&nbsp; sometimes you can take a bonus action&quot;.&nbsp; We could debate which is worse, but in the end, the 5e design team went with something they thought the majority of players and DM's would find familiar and easier to use.Or they just wanted people not to think of 4e mechanics having anything to do with 5e.&nbsp; : )</blockquote>

[QUOTE="James Gasik, post: 8570550, member: 6877472"] "Worse" is a value judgement that can only be demonstrably proven by consensus (that is to say, what more people find better/easier to use). Most people think that Base Attack Bonus, for example, is superior to Thac0 or the older attack matrices. But there is, and will always be disagreement on that point. Certainly, some older systems were not streamlined or concise, and sometimes confusing. Many subsystems that required percentage rolls, for example, were phased out in order to streamline the game and make it's rules easier to digest. I think the proper term we should use is "familiar". If the 3.5 XPH system is more familiar to more players than the 1e system found in the Appendices or the 2e system found in the CPH, that will probably be the system used as the foundation for a newer system because it is more familiar to a broader audience. The purpose of 5e was to "bring everyone along for the ride". I think Move, Minor, Standard was a better system than "so you can move but it's not really an action, just a thing you do, and you can take an action. sometimes you can take a bonus action". We could debate which is worse, but in the end, the 5e design team went with something they thought the majority of players and DM's would find familiar and easier to use. Or they just wanted people not to think of 4e mechanics having anything to do with 5e. : ) [/QUOTE]

Verification