Jaeger
That someone better
In reading this thread while reading through and digesting my copies of the 4e rules - AbdulAlhazred's post here really helped me clarify some thoughts about the game.
I skipped the whole late 2e to 4e era and only played 5e for the first time this past year. I spent all that intervening time playing almost every other game not called D&D. I got the 4e rules as a reference to see what was done with the game. (And honestly to see what the whole fuss was about.)
So I really have zero emotional investment in what this or that edition of D&D did "better".
One thing that became clear to me was that in order to maximize what your PC class does: You must pay attention to how things work, and what is going on.
My impression - this codification drives a group to engage with the game in a very specific way to take advantage of everything in the rules.
It does not strike me as an edition of the game where you can really play fast and loose with the rules.
Or another way of putting it: The way the GM has to arbitrate more of the combat (And thus situational and environmental aspects are pure GM fiat) - players will naturally invest in attacks that are not as dependent on GM Fiat/specific environmental or situational conditions.
One thing I would say is that it is my impression that 4e drives players towards a more specific playstyle (i.e. Having to engage with the game rules in a more specific way) than other editions of the game due to the preciseness of its rules.
The preciseness of its rules also drives the need for more consistent knowledge of the rules from the group as a whole.
So I can easily see how a lot of D&D groups bounced off of this hard.
Especially groups that had players that engaged with the rules at different levels of 'mastery'.
Conversely if the style of game 4e delivered ticked your fun boxes in the right way: I can see how those who liked 4e - really liked it a lot. I can easily see how moving to what 5e does would be viewed as a big step back by 4e fans.
I do like some of the ideas I see in 4e, and I will do a one shot with it to see how it works in the wild.
But I also recognize that there is no way in hell 4e is a good fit for my group for a long term fantasy campaign. I have several players that will not engage with the rules enough to make it sing like it should.
I skipped the whole late 2e to 4e era and only played 5e for the first time this past year. I spent all that intervening time playing almost every other game not called D&D. I got the 4e rules as a reference to see what was done with the game. (And honestly to see what the whole fuss was about.)
So I really have zero emotional investment in what this or that edition of D&D did "better".
Beyond that it is just IMPORTANT. A fighter can use specific class features against opponents within his reach when they move or attack. This is the heart of what the class does, not just one piece. Likewise flanking opponents and getting CA on them is a pretty important consideration, and it is defined in terms of the grid. This is, again, BECAUSE of the desire to make things transparent to the players. It should never arise that there's a doubt about who is where that has to be resolved by the GM, or about exactly where an AoE falls on the map. These are all things that can be unclear in other editions.
One thing that became clear to me was that in order to maximize what your PC class does: You must pay attention to how things work, and what is going on.
That is, it is a fairly codified and process-driven rules structure. One of the implications of this is that both the players and the GM can look at the situation and decide what it means and what they are going to do about it. This makes 4e inherently amenable to genuine tactical analysis, and thus you can select character options in such a way as to make various tactics work for you, or to thwart certain types of options your opponents might try. This also couples with the combat roles, which provide a ready-made structuring of tactical situations on both the party and the monster side. The strict codification of the grid, action economy, etc. furthers that.
My impression - this codification drives a group to engage with the game in a very specific way to take advantage of everything in the rules.
It does not strike me as an edition of the game where you can really play fast and loose with the rules.
falls to the GM to arbitrate in every element of combat such that there are really on a very few optimum ways to play, and they tend to work regardless of what the opposition is, for the most part.
Or another way of putting it: The way the GM has to arbitrate more of the combat (And thus situational and environmental aspects are pure GM fiat) - players will naturally invest in attacks that are not as dependent on GM Fiat/specific environmental or situational conditions.
Some people seem to have found this preciseness inhibiting. Others objected to the way it puts the players on nearly an equal footing with the GM in being able to say what is what. I assume other people just didn't enjoy that aesthetic.
One thing I would say is that it is my impression that 4e drives players towards a more specific playstyle (i.e. Having to engage with the game rules in a more specific way) than other editions of the game due to the preciseness of its rules.
The preciseness of its rules also drives the need for more consistent knowledge of the rules from the group as a whole.
So I can easily see how a lot of D&D groups bounced off of this hard.
Especially groups that had players that engaged with the rules at different levels of 'mastery'.
Conversely if the style of game 4e delivered ticked your fun boxes in the right way: I can see how those who liked 4e - really liked it a lot. I can easily see how moving to what 5e does would be viewed as a big step back by 4e fans.
I do like some of the ideas I see in 4e, and I will do a one shot with it to see how it works in the wild.
But I also recognize that there is no way in hell 4e is a good fit for my group for a long term fantasy campaign. I have several players that will not engage with the rules enough to make it sing like it should.