Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is Quality?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8644634" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>Now this? You won't hear me argue about any of this.</p><p></p><p>4e aimed to be maximally transparent. I'm fairly sure Heinsoo and the other designers thought that if the rules were clear and clean, no muss no fuss, that they would be giving people what they wanted, rules that "fall away" or "get out of the way" because there would be no difficulty in seeing how they worked. As soon as you knew what a certain keyword meant, you would know what it meant everywhere. Learn the basic lingo, and everything else falls into place. This would free players and DMs to tell the stories they liked, unburdened by cumbersome verbiage that many of them would have ignored anyway.</p><p></p><p>This proved incorrect. Many players disliked the layout and presentation, seeing it as sterile and formulaic. Even though spells have always been formulaic, this made their formulaic nature seemingly too obvious. Despite flowery natural language being objectively more difficult to parse (consider the many complaints in ye olden dayse about how difficult it was to use 3e monster star locks), players valued the texture and implicit weight of that presentation, even if they never actually intended to use even a single sentence of it (whether due to not wanting that specific item/spell/etc., using a homebrew world where such details would be overridden, using house-rules that modified things too far, etc.)</p><p></p><p>I would in fact call this an objective decrease in quality, making the game more opaque, more involved to use, because a degree of "clunky" engagement, where you must carefully parse the whole text of (say) a particular spell in order to use it correctly, is in fact desirable to many <em>existing </em>players. It is less desirable to <em> new</em> players, but 5e was always about targeting lapsed fans well enough to keep things going. New players were always a secondary concern. If it <em>had</em> been meant for new players specifically, I can guarantee the early levelling experience would have been quite a bit different.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8644634, member: 6790260"] Now this? You won't hear me argue about any of this. 4e aimed to be maximally transparent. I'm fairly sure Heinsoo and the other designers thought that if the rules were clear and clean, no muss no fuss, that they would be giving people what they wanted, rules that "fall away" or "get out of the way" because there would be no difficulty in seeing how they worked. As soon as you knew what a certain keyword meant, you would know what it meant everywhere. Learn the basic lingo, and everything else falls into place. This would free players and DMs to tell the stories they liked, unburdened by cumbersome verbiage that many of them would have ignored anyway. This proved incorrect. Many players disliked the layout and presentation, seeing it as sterile and formulaic. Even though spells have always been formulaic, this made their formulaic nature seemingly too obvious. Despite flowery natural language being objectively more difficult to parse (consider the many complaints in ye olden dayse about how difficult it was to use 3e monster star locks), players valued the texture and implicit weight of that presentation, even if they never actually intended to use even a single sentence of it (whether due to not wanting that specific item/spell/etc., using a homebrew world where such details would be overridden, using house-rules that modified things too far, etc.) I would in fact call this an objective decrease in quality, making the game more opaque, more involved to use, because a degree of "clunky" engagement, where you must carefully parse the whole text of (say) a particular spell in order to use it correctly, is in fact desirable to many [I]existing [/I]players. It is less desirable to [I] new[/I] players, but 5e was always about targeting lapsed fans well enough to keep things going. New players were always a secondary concern. If it [I]had[/I] been meant for new players specifically, I can guarantee the early levelling experience would have been quite a bit different. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is Quality?
Top