Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why does 5E SUCK?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6653739" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>No, what is 'flawed' if you wish to use such language, is the PRESENTATION of the information. You present it as 'hard', but that's not really what it is, except in some context that never enters into the actual game.</p><p></p><p>I don't think this is at all unique to 4e. In fact the 5e game I'm playing in right now is rife with this. IME it has nothing to do with 4e. There's not even the slightest barrier in place of a hard-edged 4e game where you can brutally slaughter characters for whatever reasons float your boat. The worst you can say is that ALL modern forms of D&D require significant work in chargen, which can deter this sort of thing. CB was actually a pretty good answer to that, I can make a 4e PC in under 2 minutes if I'm willing to take recommended feats and not angst too much over which power to select.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I think when he was talking about CR he was talking about monster challenge rating, its not at all reliable. In fact 5e's CR system is a hot mess. Still, 4e aside, its no worse than every other D&D and so it certainly can be lived with, as all 5e's quirks can be.</p><p></p><p>And again, with the DCs it is presentation. We all know what you can do with them, but its a more obtuse system because the labels aren't meaningful relative to the only thing that matters in the game, the PCs. Nobody cares about 'compared with all the challenges in D&D'. That comparison is of no value to the DM at the table. IMHO the key, central, and most important thing that 4e ever did was to take a step back and re-examine the tenets and goals of the game, and then reshape the mechanics to serve those goals and tenets. The failure of 5e, such as it is, is in failing to do likewise. I could always trust the principles of the 4e designers when they created material. It would always be useful and usable because they would design it in light of actual game play. I don't know how to trust the 5e designers in the same way. Sometimes they do the most ridiculous things for reasons I can't even fathom. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Its also hard to build a character to PASS DCs in 5e! So the problem is everyone has the same difficulty passing them. Sure, at very high levels the game just barely starts to really differentiate, but the fact that people constantly bring up level 20 Expertise characters and such is exactly a sign of the issue. </p><p></p><p>As for 'asking is it acid-resistant' how is 4e's system not amenable to that? In fact, again, you ignore the solution, running an SC, which is exactly focused on those sorts of questions. You use narrative to explore and approach the problem and some checks to introduce some variability into the process without making long-shot DCs the primary focus. Still, you can always set a huge DC for atmospheric or other reasons if you wish. </p><p></p><p></p><p>No it isn't, they're utterly the same. The bad guy blasts you with a 'push' effect. In 4e you go over the edge, now you can make a check, can you grab the dangling rope? 5e, you go over the edge, well you have a save DC, presumably saving means SOMETHING fictional, does it not? Or are you maintaining that the difference is purely in the fiction? If so that's not psychological at its root, its mechanical. There's no difference here though, since each thing should be rooted in fiction the character 'heroically saves himself' or 'heroically resists' etc. In both cases its an active participation in the game.</p><p></p><p></p><p>This is silly. If you really want to play that way, yes of course you can. That's not what we're talking about here. Characters died quite frequently in my 4e campaigns for instance. They just died for REASONS, not usually "oops I missed a check." You're dangling from the rope, now, what can happen that is interesting. Oh, you can see the bad guy climbing up the back side of the platform to backstab the wizard who's performing the ritual, oh oh! You can swing down to a lower level or try to climb the rope and save the wizard, while some demonic rats are gnawing on it. Take the big risk, or survive until tomorrow to fight again? Going splat is what is boring. I mean maybe at some point going splat is fine, you gambled, you lost, you've played your last card, the character's number is finally up. Its all a matter of context. Dramatic play is not about endless last-second saves, that's a mere pastiche of the technique.</p><p></p><p></p><p>No, not true. You can still set DCs to any value, they just get adjusted by 1 point up or down per level of the PC. Again, this is not the way 4e envisages DC working, you simply asked the question "how would you emulate 5e's static DC system in 4e" and I answered, you'd null out the bonus progression by scaling. I have no idea why you would ever do this BTW, its not something I'm suggesting, but it does illustrate that 4e's DC system can flex quite a lot.</p><p></p><p></p><p>And that's an issue! 4e allows the possibility of DCs that you simply cannot pass, yet at least. Now, to some extent so does 5e, but its not the same clear-cut thing.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Every GM largely tailors their adventures such that the challenges are beatable in some way. Lets not even kid ourselves about that. Every published module features a byline "adventure for characters of level X to Y". To pretend otherwise is to again go into this unfathomable mumbo jumbo land where you pretend that you're playing some other game than you're really playing. Again, I most admire 4e for in general stabbing that monstrosity in the heart. When it produces a mechanic it is producing it such that it fits the game at the table. </p><p></p><p>Obviously some subset of people will just play in a way that is so idiosyncratic that a given set of rules won't match up with their needs, but 4e was the practical edition. It always took the road that the game was first and foremost a game played at the table by people. Sometimes it might not actually achieve some of what it attempted, but it was all engineered in the service of good play, not some theoretical aesthetic judgement of how D&D should be that has to be worked around in practice. 5e very definitely backed off from that.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 6653739, member: 82106"] No, what is 'flawed' if you wish to use such language, is the PRESENTATION of the information. You present it as 'hard', but that's not really what it is, except in some context that never enters into the actual game. I don't think this is at all unique to 4e. In fact the 5e game I'm playing in right now is rife with this. IME it has nothing to do with 4e. There's not even the slightest barrier in place of a hard-edged 4e game where you can brutally slaughter characters for whatever reasons float your boat. The worst you can say is that ALL modern forms of D&D require significant work in chargen, which can deter this sort of thing. CB was actually a pretty good answer to that, I can make a 4e PC in under 2 minutes if I'm willing to take recommended feats and not angst too much over which power to select. I think when he was talking about CR he was talking about monster challenge rating, its not at all reliable. In fact 5e's CR system is a hot mess. Still, 4e aside, its no worse than every other D&D and so it certainly can be lived with, as all 5e's quirks can be. And again, with the DCs it is presentation. We all know what you can do with them, but its a more obtuse system because the labels aren't meaningful relative to the only thing that matters in the game, the PCs. Nobody cares about 'compared with all the challenges in D&D'. That comparison is of no value to the DM at the table. IMHO the key, central, and most important thing that 4e ever did was to take a step back and re-examine the tenets and goals of the game, and then reshape the mechanics to serve those goals and tenets. The failure of 5e, such as it is, is in failing to do likewise. I could always trust the principles of the 4e designers when they created material. It would always be useful and usable because they would design it in light of actual game play. I don't know how to trust the 5e designers in the same way. Sometimes they do the most ridiculous things for reasons I can't even fathom. Its also hard to build a character to PASS DCs in 5e! So the problem is everyone has the same difficulty passing them. Sure, at very high levels the game just barely starts to really differentiate, but the fact that people constantly bring up level 20 Expertise characters and such is exactly a sign of the issue. As for 'asking is it acid-resistant' how is 4e's system not amenable to that? In fact, again, you ignore the solution, running an SC, which is exactly focused on those sorts of questions. You use narrative to explore and approach the problem and some checks to introduce some variability into the process without making long-shot DCs the primary focus. Still, you can always set a huge DC for atmospheric or other reasons if you wish. No it isn't, they're utterly the same. The bad guy blasts you with a 'push' effect. In 4e you go over the edge, now you can make a check, can you grab the dangling rope? 5e, you go over the edge, well you have a save DC, presumably saving means SOMETHING fictional, does it not? Or are you maintaining that the difference is purely in the fiction? If so that's not psychological at its root, its mechanical. There's no difference here though, since each thing should be rooted in fiction the character 'heroically saves himself' or 'heroically resists' etc. In both cases its an active participation in the game. This is silly. If you really want to play that way, yes of course you can. That's not what we're talking about here. Characters died quite frequently in my 4e campaigns for instance. They just died for REASONS, not usually "oops I missed a check." You're dangling from the rope, now, what can happen that is interesting. Oh, you can see the bad guy climbing up the back side of the platform to backstab the wizard who's performing the ritual, oh oh! You can swing down to a lower level or try to climb the rope and save the wizard, while some demonic rats are gnawing on it. Take the big risk, or survive until tomorrow to fight again? Going splat is what is boring. I mean maybe at some point going splat is fine, you gambled, you lost, you've played your last card, the character's number is finally up. Its all a matter of context. Dramatic play is not about endless last-second saves, that's a mere pastiche of the technique. No, not true. You can still set DCs to any value, they just get adjusted by 1 point up or down per level of the PC. Again, this is not the way 4e envisages DC working, you simply asked the question "how would you emulate 5e's static DC system in 4e" and I answered, you'd null out the bonus progression by scaling. I have no idea why you would ever do this BTW, its not something I'm suggesting, but it does illustrate that 4e's DC system can flex quite a lot. And that's an issue! 4e allows the possibility of DCs that you simply cannot pass, yet at least. Now, to some extent so does 5e, but its not the same clear-cut thing. Every GM largely tailors their adventures such that the challenges are beatable in some way. Lets not even kid ourselves about that. Every published module features a byline "adventure for characters of level X to Y". To pretend otherwise is to again go into this unfathomable mumbo jumbo land where you pretend that you're playing some other game than you're really playing. Again, I most admire 4e for in general stabbing that monstrosity in the heart. When it produces a mechanic it is producing it such that it fits the game at the table. Obviously some subset of people will just play in a way that is so idiosyncratic that a given set of rules won't match up with their needs, but 4e was the practical edition. It always took the road that the game was first and foremost a game played at the table by people. Sometimes it might not actually achieve some of what it attempted, but it was all engineered in the service of good play, not some theoretical aesthetic judgement of how D&D should be that has to be worked around in practice. 5e very definitely backed off from that. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why does 5E SUCK?
Top