Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Enrico Poli1" data-source="post: 7885392" data-attributes="member: 6947027">Why D&amp;D 3e/3.5/Pathfinder worked?<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">d20 system resolved many inconsistencies and absurdities. Both BECMI and AD&amp;D 2e were full of loopholes, the game was baroque, arbitrary, unbalanced.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Managed to keep the feel of the original game, as well as the settings (at least the most popular ones).</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">The character building and optimization was alluring.</li>
</ul>Those features made 3rd edition overall (slightly?) better then AD&amp;D 1 and 2, IMO. But then...Why D&amp;D 3e/3.5/Pathfinder failed?<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Rollplay over roleplay (yes, the system encouraged that).</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">System bloat caused by splatbooks, with too many classes, prestige classes, feats and spells. Optimizers dominated the game.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">High numbers and multiple bonuses eventually made combat way too complex to keep track of.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Did not solve but aggravated the caster supremacy problem.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Magic item proliferation &amp; magic item market.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Too much effort for the DM to prepare NPCs.</li>
</ul>To sum it up, the strive to rationalise every aspect of the game had the unexpected side effect of too much complexity. Enters 5e:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Roleplay over rollplay</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Rulings over Rules</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Bounded Accuracy makes game simpler and enjoyable.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Mitigates caster supremacy</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Magic Item attunement / no magic item market</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Retrocompatible.</li>
</ul>IMO, 5e managed to capture the best of all the previous editions AND solve many old problems.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Enrico Poli1, post: 7885392, member: 6947027"] Why D&D 3e/3.5/Pathfinder worked? [LIST] [*]d20 system resolved many inconsistencies and absurdities. Both BECMI and AD&D 2e were full of loopholes, the game was baroque, arbitrary, unbalanced. [*]Managed to keep the feel of the original game, as well as the settings (at least the most popular ones). [*]The character building and optimization was alluring. [/LIST] Those features made 3rd edition overall (slightly?) better then AD&D 1 and 2, IMO. But then... Why D&D 3e/3.5/Pathfinder failed? [LIST] [*]Rollplay over roleplay (yes, the system encouraged that). [*]System bloat caused by splatbooks, with too many classes, prestige classes, feats and spells. Optimizers dominated the game. [*]High numbers and multiple bonuses eventually made combat way too complex to keep track of. [*]Did not solve but aggravated the caster supremacy problem. [*]Magic item proliferation & magic item market. [*]Too much effort for the DM to prepare NPCs. [/LIST] To sum it up, the strive to rationalise every aspect of the game had the unexpected side effect of too much complexity. Enters 5e: [LIST] [*]Roleplay over rollplay [*]Rulings over Rules [*]Bounded Accuracy makes game simpler and enjoyable. [*]Mitigates caster supremacy [*]Magic Item attunement / no magic item market [*]Retrocompatible. [/LIST] IMO, 5e managed to capture the best of all the previous editions AND solve many old problems. [/QUOTE]

Verification