Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6003234" data-attributes="member: 996">I would be stunned if anyone thought any version of D&amp;D rated a 9 or 10, unless the scale went up to 20 or something.&nbsp; If 1 is Spawn of Feshawn, and 10 is some hypothetical perfect FRPG, 4e might rate a 6, being something better than merely adequate at some levels of play and functional at all levels.&nbsp; Less if you include HotFL/FK and HoS.&nbsp; Oh, certainly.&nbsp; No telling how many they may be, but if WotC has an idea that they're a strong majority, it would give them a lot more latitude to cater those who hate 4e.&nbsp; And that's speculating about splinters within one splinter of the fractured fan-base.&nbsp; 5e's task is truely unenviable.I can't agree.&nbsp; The 'main game' included things like combat, which, alone, was a quite complex system compared to more modern games - 'modern' 3-4e D&amp;D included.&nbsp; A glance at anything, from weapon tables to spell write-ups, to initiative rules, to saving throws in AD&amp;D makes it obvious that the game has actually become simpler, in the domain of the 'main system,' in the WotC era.&nbsp; Not sure if that's a great thing or not, but it's evidently a thing.OTOH, I'd agree that AD&amp;D was often played in a streamlined manner, because DMs streamlined it, ignoring and changing rules at need.&nbsp; The zietgiest of the day was very accepting of such things.&nbsp; That changed sometime early in the run of 3e, though.&nbsp; I'm not convinced 5e can change it back by fiat nor by example, though it'd be a change in attitude I wouldn't find amiss.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6003234, member: 996"] I would be stunned if anyone thought any version of D&D rated a 9 or 10, unless the scale went up to 20 or something. If 1 is Spawn of Feshawn, and 10 is some hypothetical perfect FRPG, 4e might rate a 6, being something better than merely adequate at some levels of play and functional at all levels. Less if you include HotFL/FK and HoS. Oh, certainly. No telling how many they may be, but if WotC has an idea that they're a strong majority, it would give them a lot more latitude to cater those who hate 4e. And that's speculating about splinters within one splinter of the fractured fan-base. 5e's task is truely unenviable. I can't agree. The 'main game' included things like combat, which, alone, was a quite complex system compared to more modern games - 'modern' 3-4e D&D included. A glance at anything, from weapon tables to spell write-ups, to initiative rules, to saving throws in AD&D makes it obvious that the game has actually become simpler, in the domain of the 'main system,' in the WotC era. Not sure if that's a great thing or not, but it's evidently a thing. OTOH, I'd agree that AD&D was often [i]played[/i] in a streamlined manner, because DMs streamlined it, ignoring and changing rules at need. The zietgiest of the day was very accepting of such things. That changed sometime early in the run of 3e, though. I'm not convinced 5e can change it back by fiat nor by example, though it'd be a change in attitude I wouldn't find amiss. [/QUOTE]

Verification