Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Herschel" data-source="post: 6533213" data-attributes="member: 78357">Perception is a funny thing. A lot of the 4E mechanical design is still there if someone takes the time to actually look, Wizards just obfuscates it through terminology and lessened efficiency rather than clear, concise communication.&nbsp; Why would they not intentionally incorporate 4E design? In 4E the Fighter was in the running for the most popular class, no longer over-shadowed by the Wizard (and Clerics/Druids in 3E). The mistake many are making is that this edition was to &quot;purge the infidel 4E and its unwashed fans&quot; from the game. The goal was to try and gain sales from all those folks who play WotC's IP while never giving them a dime while also trying to keep as much of their existing customer base as well. One of the biggest complaints about 5E is that it's made to be inoffensive and does a number of things okay, but doesn't have any big, new or innovative draw.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Herschel, post: 6533213, member: 78357"] Perception is a funny thing. A lot of the 4E mechanical design is still there if someone takes the time to actually look, Wizards just obfuscates it through terminology and lessened efficiency rather than clear, concise communication. Why would they not intentionally incorporate 4E design? In 4E the Fighter was in the running for the most popular class, no longer over-shadowed by the Wizard (and Clerics/Druids in 3E). The mistake many are making is that this edition was to "purge the infidel 4E and its unwashed fans" from the game. The goal was to try and gain sales from all those folks who play WotC's IP while never giving them a dime while also trying to keep as much of their existing customer base as well. One of the biggest complaints about 5E is that it's made to be inoffensive and does a number of things okay, but doesn't have any big, new or innovative draw. [/QUOTE]

Verification