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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Minigiant" data-source="post: 9181200" data-attributes="member: 63508">One of the main aspects of 4E was not really as tactical play but it's design goal of fulfilling fantasies. 4E as an exition went out to say "What are the fantasies that we want to be important in play" and resolved it's rules around it.Outside of itself also bloating hit points, One of its biggest sin was displaying exactly how the fantasies that D&D players and D&D DMs have described would look like in actual rules. Fans wanted things but they didn't like the actual rules required to get them.This is the main point of contention in 5E. There are things in D&D that the fans want a high level fighter or high level wizard or high level rogue to be able to do.BUTIt will require specific rules to enforce these things. And 5E is on a DM empowerment kick where it doesn't want to tell DMs what they're supposed to be doing so instead it doesn't include the rules as base rules to enforce the things that the fanbase actually does want.Quite frankly if you ask D&D fans should a high level fighter be able to punk 2 or 3 aggressive goblin ninjas per round, I'd expect that over 50% of them say would say yes. The point of contention is that once they say yes and you tell them they have to make an extra rule to do so they get upset unless it's the DM themselves who make that rule. If it's a default base rule, there's so much crying.And that's the rub.*Muh Freedum to the same thing as everyone else!"Like when I let my niece and nephew feel like they had a chance to win at games before I crush their dreams of victory. I ain't their daddy. They never had a chance in reality. I'm Mean Uncle Minigiant who always gets lucky. Sure sure. Make your move nephew.</blockquote>

Verification