Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sadras" data-source="post: 6541982" data-attributes="member: 6688277">IMO. Roles have always existed in D&D, but the intention of one’s role , at least prior 4e, was not to limit them to combat only. We all knew where the strengths and weaknesses of each class were and those were intermingled with how the character was role-played which determined that individual’s role was within the party. In combat, everyone’s role changed dependant on what tactics were required or deemed to be required to ensure success.Most of the above never really changed in 4e, except that the party role / class role took a major backseat to a defined combat role which the mechanics by design fully supported. So in 4e combat role bled into the mechanics, whereas in prior editions the mechanics bled into a role. The difference in the above being When you define a combat role first. For instance, Leader – the powers designed ensure that you are able to assist your party during combat conditions (healing, saves, movement, additional attacks, morale ...etc) and protect yourself (armour proficiency, weapon proficiency, turn undead…etc). You select Leader-designed powers. Your role is forever defined as a Leader and you have the mechanics to back that up.When you design mechanics first. Mechanics for a Cleric include Divine Spells, Armour Proficiency, Weapon Proficiency, Turn Undead…etc. The mechanics, as you can see are the same, but how you use them will determine your role in the party.Your combat role is whatever it needs to be for a given combat – in some combats you may only heal, in others you might only fight and in others you may impose fear on your enemies and make them scatter. You may do the same in 4e, however there is no mechanical umbrella of Leader, that concept does not exist in the game. 5e, being an all-inclusive edition, attempts to emulate and cater for all playstyles. Simple vs Customization, Roles vs Combat Roles, Alignment vs Non-Alignment…etc The basic version seems to cater to a BECMI audience.The full version attempts to cater to the rest of us:(a) including the 4e crowd which define their characters with combat roles and more than often,  selects mechanics which cater to such roles, strengthening their abilities in those combat roles; as well as those who  (b) do not define their characters via 4e combat roles, and prefer to select mechanics based on what they wish their character to do rather than to a specific designated combat role.It is rather ridiculous to have us arguing over a game which appears to cater to both our styles or view points. This thread is actually testament that the 5e designers have actually succeeded in unifying the player base.Instead of us arguing which is the better game, we are now arguing over which game the 5e resembles most. From a strange perspective, instead of a D&D game not being inclusive enough, it is too inclusive <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

Verification