D&D 4E Where was 4e headed before it was canned?

[Garthanos]

Um, just a quick note on the bolded area. This is not necessarily true in that sense.

Take 3e ....PLEASE!*

3e was definitely focused on so-called "Player Agency" by focusing on RAW and player-facing options; however, it was certainly not "rules light" nor was it "free form".

I knew there was a strong devotion to RAW is that actual player agency? It certainly helps create a sense of player expectation but since that means he can use raw to enable personal agenda. Hmmmmm. OK I will buy it.

Skill challenges could be cast as DM focused I suppose as well as more than anything it is a DM side mechanics

However as has been mentioned here presentation matters they were presented in a way to encourage player agency with regards to letting and encouraging players figure out approaches to problems and letting them invest in those to make it happen. They also encouraged letting skill application be just as impactful as rituals or other methods.

 

[Imaro]

Fewer tools in my opinion ie there is no skill challenge for 5e that you can improvise knowing about it from elsewhere is still on you not the game. Its basically laying claim to a house rule something which any D&D has.

Well the thing is 5e even facilitated a great way of gaining ever expanding tools to be used with it's base rules framework by opening the game up to numerous publishers on DM's Guild and in traditional space. Easily accessible rules outside the corebooks with near infinite space for others to add and build upon the framework...unlike a rulebook with a limit to it's number of pages... sadly 4e was a pretty closed off system during it's time in print.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Garthanos]

Well the thing is 5e even facilitated a great way of gaining ever expanding tools to be used with it's base rules framework by opening the game up to numerous publishers on DM's Guild and in traditional space.

There were definitely some very suckage administrative decisions blame the OGL and need to establish new IP which is more than a little sad.

 

[Umbran]

Fewer restrictions and assumed systems = more free in a formal sense.

Ah. Maybe I see part of the issue.

"Freeform" not just used to describe the rules directly, but instead the results of the rules. A very structured ruleset can produce very freeform play results.

Let us consider just the magic in the game. In D&D, pretty much all the magic the PCs can manifest is done in terms of defined spells that do very specific things. It is a very structured ruleset, and produces very structured results.

Mage: the Ascension was all about playing magi, wizards, spellcasters - the magic system was the central part of the game, the largest part, and solidly structured around how you accomplish a feat of magic. But what the feat of magic was? That was very freeform. With the same rules structure one could blast you with lightning. Or Fire. Slam you to the floor with excess weight, or light up a theater stage performance. The results were freeform, not structured by the rules.

 

[Garthanos]

So, I think a large part of the issue is that (as I referenced before) there tends to be a certain proxy-fight going on that is not apparent, IMO, with other editions of D&D.

To be melodramatic - Did other editions die in a blaze of online e war?

Maybe I'm wrong- after all, I did sit all of those debates out, but (for example) I can rant about 2e without anyone taking it that personally; to quote the Big Lebowski, "That's just, like, my opinion man."

Yeh try dissing on save or Dies... like saying they make D&D characters seem less heroic than Flutter-shy
(insert video here about a pony facing off a basilisk - which by the way is incredibly heroic and demonstrates how a struggle is way cooler than a single yes or no die roll).

But for whatever reason (ahem) there is this particular and continuing need to argue about aspects of 4e.

This thread is asking about where 4e was headed before the dramatic and obvious shift of the direction where WOTC seemed to fold under the pressure exerted by ummm less than polite people - and some changes between 4e and 5e really point to a compliance with those who whined rather than a legitimate exploration of possible future D&D derived of the games better elements.

Is it possible to cram some of the design paradigm of 4e back into 5e... I am not sure I have given up.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Garthanos]

Oh and lowkey The oath bound hero is an awesome archetype : fight me

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Garthanos]

..... well, you did insist! ¯\(ツ)/¯

yes humor

I actually talk about 5e and 4e in concert largely because i want to see how much of what I see as lost by 5e is actually lost and to what extent there are things I could bring back into it (hey it is supposed to be modworthy) Now some of what I want may not be possible because of some fundamental design choices, but I am not sure how much that might be true.