Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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 would 5E be like if the playtest's modularity promise was kept?
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="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 8640541" data-attributes="member: 7006"><p>Monte Cook's statement about 5E's modularity has been proven true and has been proven false, depending entirely on who is making the statement and how much of their preferred game they needed to have represented for them to consider 5E's modularity a success.</p><p></p><p>There are people who merely care about the essence or spirit of their preferred system... and by taking or using only parts of 5E that they want... their itch got scratched. 5E's rules were modular enough to give them what they felt they wanted in their preferred D&D. Using just the Basic Rules might have been all that was needed to give them a 1E type of feel, whereas adding in all the special combat rules in the DMG of Disarm, Marking, Flanking, and re-writing spell blocks to be just the mechanical expression without all the natural language fluff around it might be all that was needed to give someone a 4E feel. If you only took the parts you wanted from the three books and created your game from them, the essence could be brought forth for those people.</p><p></p><p>Whereas other people wanted and want an almost exact replica of their preferred edition... the same numbers in equal levels and amounts, the same classes and what they can do, the same types of rules that allow them to move their characters the same way they do in their preferred edition. And of course 5E could not and can not accomplish those things because different editions had complete opposites in many of these rules. For example, there's no way to have a single game which has their baseline mechanics have both the low amounts of numbers of BECMI <em>and</em> the exceedingly high numbers and modifiers of 3E, no matter how "modular" you might want to try and make the game. And thus that right there automatically makes Cook's statement an impossibility for some people.</p><p></p><p>I mean just the fact that there was no specific "Warlord" class in 5E automatically made some people think they were lied to about 5E's so-called "modularity". And it doesn't matter how many subclasses or Battlemaster maneuvers you could take to create the essence of what a Warlord might possibly do... no Warlord Class means 4E cannot be made and thus 5E modularity is complete and utter BS.</p><p></p><p>And at that point, all WotC can do is put up their hands and say "Yep, you got us. 5E is not going to have the modularity you were expecting or demanding. It is its own game that cannot and will not completely match your experiences or expectations of your preferred edition. Sorry." And I get it might be disappointing to hear that... but at the end of the day, it just forces a person to decide what is really more important to them... moving to 5E because it's the one currently supported and can find the most willing players (even if a lot of the rules don't match their preferences)... or sticking with their preferred game so that they can play the game they want-- but just have to put in a little more work finding new players and creating/adapting new material to use for their game.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 8640541, member: 7006"] Monte Cook's statement about 5E's modularity has been proven true and has been proven false, depending entirely on who is making the statement and how much of their preferred game they needed to have represented for them to consider 5E's modularity a success. There are people who merely care about the essence or spirit of their preferred system... and by taking or using only parts of 5E that they want... their itch got scratched. 5E's rules were modular enough to give them what they felt they wanted in their preferred D&D. Using just the Basic Rules might have been all that was needed to give them a 1E type of feel, whereas adding in all the special combat rules in the DMG of Disarm, Marking, Flanking, and re-writing spell blocks to be just the mechanical expression without all the natural language fluff around it might be all that was needed to give someone a 4E feel. If you only took the parts you wanted from the three books and created your game from them, the essence could be brought forth for those people. Whereas other people wanted and want an almost exact replica of their preferred edition... the same numbers in equal levels and amounts, the same classes and what they can do, the same types of rules that allow them to move their characters the same way they do in their preferred edition. And of course 5E could not and can not accomplish those things because different editions had complete opposites in many of these rules. For example, there's no way to have a single game which has their baseline mechanics have both the low amounts of numbers of BECMI [I]and[/I] the exceedingly high numbers and modifiers of 3E, no matter how "modular" you might want to try and make the game. And thus that right there automatically makes Cook's statement an impossibility for some people. I mean just the fact that there was no specific "Warlord" class in 5E automatically made some people think they were lied to about 5E's so-called "modularity". And it doesn't matter how many subclasses or Battlemaster maneuvers you could take to create the essence of what a Warlord might possibly do... no Warlord Class means 4E cannot be made and thus 5E modularity is complete and utter BS. And at that point, all WotC can do is put up their hands and say "Yep, you got us. 5E is not going to have the modularity you were expecting or demanding. It is its own game that cannot and will not completely match your experiences or expectations of your preferred edition. Sorry." And I get it might be disappointing to hear that... but at the end of the day, it just forces a person to decide what is really more important to them... moving to 5E because it's the one currently supported and can find the most willing players (even if a lot of the rules don't match their preferences)... or sticking with their preferred game so that they can play the game they want-- but just have to put in a little more work finding new players and creating/adapting new material to use for their game. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What would 5E be like if the playtest's modularity promise was kept?
Top