Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5208735" data-attributes="member: 87792">I'm trying to think of an edition of D&D that isn't seriously mechanically flawed.  How is the 4e fight going to be less interesting than the AD&D equivalent?  Other than no games of win-roulette.  A single solo fight in 4e is little different from one in previous editions.  If it's quick and unimportant, why is it interesting?  (If it's sentry-ganking, I make it a skill challenge).  By the end of Heroic, there are two types of opponents.  Skilled and powerful and darwin awards.  4e can cope with both.  (What it doesn't do well is real grit - but my PCs were run ragged by a gang of thugs in the first couple of levels using no especially complex terrain).  And this is where I am amused by the criticism.  What sort of game does AD&D do well other than D&D (which is a genre in its own right)?  4e at least works well across a cinematic range (it just doesn't do grit).  AD&D in particular was full of Gygaxian prose, weird levels of detail (count the number of polearms), random and inconsistent modifiers, and other things that would have caused trouble for people who aren't plugged in.  Then people will be better off than if the only restaurant just serves blow your mouth off curry. 4e is not perfect this way, but it's the first edition of D&D I'd use to run something other than a game of D&D other than because people knew the system.  You miss the $1 players who will repeatedly spend $1  Depends how many of the hobgobs are minions.  And whether the party's got a Wizard or Invoker to clear the board.   Seriously, Skirmisher (Leader), two bodyguards, and ten mooks won't take that long in 4e.</blockquote>

Verification