Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6647258" data-attributes="member: 82106">Right, in essence the core system functionality of 5e and 4e is pretty much the same, at that level. The areas where I don't like 5e's functionality are really OTHER areas myself. I don't like the lack of a uniform power system. I don't like the way healing works, I don't like the 5e spin on rituals, and the general removal of player empowerment. The lack of an SC system hurts too. Monsters definitely feel rather bland, and frankly I'm starting to get genuinely bored by 5e combat.I think 4e approached fighters and OOC stuff differently. If you were a fighter and you really wanted to have a bunch of OOC abilities you could MC, you could take ritual casting, you could learn practices, or there were various feats and themes (maybe also PP/ED) that would add those things back in. In any case just the fact that skills are broadly applicable and SCs put focus on having a broad variety of them helped a lot. The earlier comment about 5e and the complete lack of any martial class with a shtick other than 'do more damage' was also telling. This is what I really MOST miss about 4e perhaps. You can be a warlord and rally your allies, while carrying a sword and being a warrior, or a fighter, holding the enemy back like a living wall, or a rogue or ranger doing lots of damage. You could also play 'semi-martial' type characters that weren't exactly CASTERS, but had a magical aspect to them, like a Warden, Barbarian, Avenger, Paladin, or Swordmage.SOME of this can happen in 5e, but the martial aspect really seems quite limited. You can MC, or use certain feats/backgrounds to kind of get a bit of what it was like to be a 4e warlord, but only a taste.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 6647258, member: 82106"] Right, in essence the core system functionality of 5e and 4e is pretty much the same, at that level. The areas where I don't like 5e's functionality are really OTHER areas myself. I don't like the lack of a uniform power system. I don't like the way healing works, I don't like the 5e spin on rituals, and the general removal of player empowerment. The lack of an SC system hurts too. Monsters definitely feel rather bland, and frankly I'm starting to get genuinely bored by 5e combat. I think 4e approached fighters and OOC stuff differently. If you were a fighter and you really wanted to have a bunch of OOC abilities you could MC, you could take ritual casting, you could learn practices, or there were various feats and themes (maybe also PP/ED) that would add those things back in. In any case just the fact that skills are broadly applicable and SCs put focus on having a broad variety of them helped a lot. The earlier comment about 5e and the complete lack of any martial class with a shtick other than 'do more damage' was also telling. This is what I really MOST miss about 4e perhaps. You can be a warlord and rally your allies, while carrying a sword and being a warrior, or a fighter, holding the enemy back like a living wall, or a rogue or ranger doing lots of damage. You could also play 'semi-martial' type characters that weren't exactly CASTERS, but had a magical aspect to them, like a Warden, Barbarian, Avenger, Paladin, or Swordmage. SOME of this can happen in 5e, but the martial aspect really seems quite limited. You can MC, or use certain feats/backgrounds to kind of get a bit of what it was like to be a 4e warlord, but only a taste. [/QUOTE]

Verification