The main thing here is that HP are not just measures of fleshly integrity, but also represent plot armor. John McClane has way more HP than any of the East German terrorists, but it's not because his body is tougher, it's because he has the screenwriter on his side. High HP people are more important, so they get more "chances." A "hit" with a sword can be a sword to sword contact that does no physical damage, but is part of the plot armor being degraded.
Matt Colville had mentioned in a Twitter thread how a game where misses are common is mostly indicative of a fast-paced combat system designed to be run with multiple players. If there are 6+ players itching to have their turn, it's best to have a system where there aren't a lot of choices, and it's alright if your turn whiffs since others can pick up the slack for you. But if every turn already takes a while and you spend a lot of brain power on making a good decision, it hurts more if nothing you did was effective that turn. I've seen players go absolutely forlorn when they just had bad luck for an entire turn and couldn't do anything, and I've been the sore player who got really annoyed when none of their efforts paid off. 5E's current design is really pushed towards the idea of you being an epic hero doing epic hero stuff, so I think people are right when they say that rolling a 2 and passing feels bad in the current edition. In older editions (or in OSR games), that's not so.
I dunno, I'm actually willing to believe all of thst, given how 5E has been received.
It hasn't been received by 90% of the people who played D&D. It has brought in many NEW people, but out of 100% of people who played up until 5e was released, there's no way 90% or more made the switch.
And then, Super Size Me! Was a highly popular documentary to site despite its results never being able to be replicated, Spurlock fudging the results by limiting his exercise and thus adding another variable, and also it turning out he lied about his starting health.
I dunno, the older player base is millions upon millions strong, based on the numbers we have. I wouldn't be surprised.
Maybe, but McDonalds being unhealthy has been a known fact for decades. I mean, their potato fries last decades without getting moldy. Processed meat, cheese and bread. Super high salt levels. And more. It ain't quality food. It doesn't reach a grade of C(average) on the health scale.
I doubt it hit even 70% of D&D players, let alone the impossible(and yes with the way humans work it's impossible) level of a 90% success rate with all D&D players up to that point.
Yeah, not a favorable analogy, and I don't thinknit really fits. McDonalds is more like those App puzzle games where you are trying to get some gold from a minotaur.
Yeah, but it helps the point that the blatant hyperbolic hit piece was, itself super popular to the point it is still being cited.
Honey and wine can do that too. Being dehydrated (and thus preserved) is not 'unhealthy', it's just a scare tactic used by people when they don't want to engage science while whipping people into a panic. Like talking about pro...
Oh.
There it is. We got one.
There's like so many better ones in the 'and more' than the buzzwords used to sell overpriced food with bugs in.
I guess I disagree in that I believe 5e is highly customizable. What I would agree with is: Wotc has not support a lot of, or deep, customization.
And I think they changed their tune based on their market research: they wanted a big tent, but they hadn't yet figured out what that constituted amon players.
Honey is different and wine goes bad.
No. Leave a piece of potato out and see if it dehydrates or quickly looks worse than a McDonald's fry that has been sitting for 50 years.
Ooooooookay. I'm not sure why you had to say that.
There's a difference between "processed" and "processed food" which has a specific meaning that is used. "Processed foods" are not good for you, even if other foods that don't fall into the "processed food" category are "processed."
Yeah, that’s a fair point. 5e is pretty customizable, it’s just that the customization isn’t really supported in the way that was originally pitched.
What the hell is this argument!Honey is different and wine goes bad.
No. Leave a piece of potato out and see if it dehydrates or quickly looks worse than a McDonald's fry that has been sitting for 50 years.
Ooooooookay. I'm not sure why you had to say that.
There's a difference between "processed" and "processed food" which has a specific meaning that is used. "Processed foods" are not good for you, even if other foods that don't fall into the "processed food" category are "processed."
Well, that much is true. But it isn't because the system can't do it.
I don't know who or what he is responding to, but it must be a doozy.What the hell is this argument!
How popular pseudo-science is high quality.What the hell is this argument!
The thing is, while this is a valid question (and despite what I say in the beginning, I think there is absolutely some modularity to 5E), it really wasn't what I had in mind. I was much more interested in discussing what a 5E that could reasonably emulate all editions within it would look like (which is what Monte Cook and the early design goals of the playtest indicated). The fact that most of the pages discuss not this but prefer dunking on the thread by saying "5E IS modular, duh" or going off onto a tangent about quality is a bit sad (also, once again, the point about OSE's model of genre rules is completely ignored!).
