Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6648062" data-attributes="member: 82106">Where's the couple of sentences in any edition? Honestly before 3e there WAS no procedure. It was sometimes stated in various AD&amp;D books that you could do some sort of an 'ability check', but it was never clearly defined as a standard mechanic, and the sheer number of alternate systems in those rules certainly didn't produce it as a de-facto standard either. In both d20 systems (3e, etc) and 4e, and 5e the 'core mechanic' is presented right up front virtually on page one of the rules. Its then only a question of presentation and elaboration of process, which 4e does on one single additional page in a pretty succinct form, which is paraphrased in my post.5e doesn't really have that one page. It talks about different types of checks in a few places. Skills are presented as non-core rules and their explanation is actually pretty obtuse if you go and just read it cold. In fact they're almost not explained, though anyone who knows modernish D&amp;D and understands the core mechanic will 'get it'. 4e is much more concise and explicit in this sense. I find this to be an issue with 5e, so many of its core systems are presented as 'options' that later on when they talk about game process they have a hard time formulating an overall vision of how play proceeds at the table. Thus really needed expositions like 4e's page 42 simply don't exist AT ALL in 5e, instead we get scattered around the books some suggestions that aren't very well cohered together.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 6648062, member: 82106"] Where's the couple of sentences in any edition? Honestly before 3e there WAS no procedure. It was sometimes stated in various AD&D books that you could do some sort of an 'ability check', but it was never clearly defined as a standard mechanic, and the sheer number of alternate systems in those rules certainly didn't produce it as a de-facto standard either. In both d20 systems (3e, etc) and 4e, and 5e the 'core mechanic' is presented right up front virtually on page one of the rules. Its then only a question of presentation and elaboration of process, which 4e does on one single additional page in a pretty succinct form, which is paraphrased in my post. 5e doesn't really have that one page. It talks about different types of checks in a few places. Skills are presented as non-core rules and their explanation is actually pretty obtuse if you go and just read it cold. In fact they're almost not explained, though anyone who knows modernish D&D and understands the core mechanic will 'get it'. 4e is much more concise and explicit in this sense. I find this to be an issue with 5e, so many of its core systems are presented as 'options' that later on when they talk about game process they have a hard time formulating an overall vision of how play proceeds at the table. Thus really needed expositions like 4e's page 42 simply don't exist AT ALL in 5e, instead we get scattered around the books some suggestions that aren't very well cohered together. [/QUOTE]

Verification