Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BobTheNob" data-source="post: 5889047" data-attributes="member: 82425">In response to the whole "you can do it in 4e" argument. Yes, this has come up time and again and continues to. People are not stupid or wrong for disagreeing with the 4e approach. For what it was worth it worked.4e however was a very strongly focused on tactical play, with a plethora of cool crap you could do in the middle of a fight, from dancing this way to stabbing three guys at once, to expanding that fireball to wing-clipping one guy and teleporting to the other side of the battlefield. The amount of cool they injected into combat mechanics was phenomenal.Then the non-combat side of things. You had skills you could roll. Yes, there was skill challenges (which our entire group grew to hate and was abandoned after a year) and the feats to boost a skill. Sometimes there was a non-combat utility or a feat that might change how a skill worked. But really, when you inject so much cool into battle dynamics and then say "and you can give some of that up for better odds at this rather drab skill resolution stuff" it doesnt really convince me that 4e had the solution to exploration gaming I was looking for. Combat in 4e was like a Ferrari where skills were like a Ford Family Truckster. Yes, I could opt for the Ford and some prefer it that way, but when we turn around and 95% of the players are opting for the Ferrari are we surprised? Do we say the players are wrong for constantly taking the Ferrari and complaining that the Family Truckster isnt what they were looking for?Saying 4e handled non-combat because the Ford existed is true. But for me, its just wasnt enough. I want rules where the non-combat/exploration aspects are a Lamborgine. Different to the ferrari, but no less cool. Just as attractive a play experience, and doesnt leave me feeling like I took a lesser option because I put my character together on perception rather than mechanics.p.s. perhaps the fact that this keeps coming up again is evidence on its own that perhaps 4e didnt nail that one.</blockquote>

Verification