Community

Dec 6, 2012 -- 12:55PM, powerroleplayer wrote:

Here's the thing.  The tactical combat module is a myth.  If it's a module, then it has no chance of winning over 4e fans.  You can't just slap on flanking and rules for using a grid and call it tactical.  4e worked as a tactical game because it was designed from the ground up as a tactical game, with action economy, resource management, enough HP that combats lasted enough rounds to bother set up a strategy, class roles fostering cooperation, and a suite of powers that created and exploited situations, bonuses, and penalties.  To add that level of tactical depth to Next, the "tactical module" would have to be bigger than the core rulebook, and rewrite substantial portions of it (in particular, the entirety of the monster manual).  I'm not saying class roles were awesome or a limited menu of AEDU powers was made of win, but they were integral to making 4e the tactical game that it was.  I'm not even saying that a tactical game is better than a non-tactical game, or that you couldn't make a tactical game without taking the 4e route.  But I really don't think you can make Next into a tactical game with a couple of AoE templates and a list of suggestions for how to model a few extra situational bonuses/penalties/actions.  And I really don't think we're going to get more than that, because at that point you're making a whole new edition, not a module.  More of a basic vs advanced thing, hopefully with a relatively easy way to convert characters back and forth.  

This.

The weight that modules have to carry is too great. I don't see how you can slap on a module and change the game so much, yet have the core function almost unhindered. I fear people expecting modules to do so much are going to be disappointed.

Dec 6, 2012 -- 1:00PM, MechaPilot wrote:

Dec 6, 2012 -- 12:55PM, powerroleplayer wrote:

Here's the thing.  The tactical combat module is a myth.  If it's a module, then it has no chance of winning over 4e fans.  You can't just slap on flanking and rules for using a grid and call it tactical.  4e worked as a tactical game because it was designed from the ground up as a tactical game, with action economy, resource management, enough HP that combats lasted enough rounds to bother set up a strategy, class roles fostering cooperation, and a suite of powers that created and exploited situations, bonuses, and penalties.  To add that level of tactical depth to Next, the "tactical module" would have to be bigger than the core rulebook, and rewrite substantial portions of it (in particular, the entirety of the monster manual).  I'm not saying class roles were awesome or a limited menu of AEDU powers was made of win, but they were integral to making 4e the tactical game that it was.  I'm not even saying that a tactical game is better than a non-tactical game, or that you couldn't make a tactical game without taking the 4e route.  But I really don't think you can make Next into a tactical game with a couple of AoE templates and a list of suggestions for how to model a few extra situational bonuses/penalties/actions.  And I really don't think we're going to get more than that, because at that point you're making a whole new edition, not a module.  More of a basic vs advanced thing, hopefully with a relatively easy way to convert characters back and forth.  

I think the tactical rules module is viable, it will just offer a little less of the tactical expereince than 4e did.  This is probably necessary since even a fair number of 4e players and DMs said that combat took too long.  However, you are right that you can't just slap grid rules on the thing and call it a day.  You need to go back and add options that interface with terrain and the grid.  At the moment, this seems to be something they could do through maneuvers, rogue skill tricks, and possibly as just an option for anyone using CE dice.

I think this sumerizes the issue. There will likely be a module that adds tactical play to the game, and makes some combats a much more tactical experience. Or some combats, as you can save it for the boss fights and set piece encounters. And it will likely play a lot like a streamlined and slightly simpler version of 4e. 
But will it be as tactical as 4e, with it's interconnecting powers, firm roles, and the like? No, probably not. 

I don't think that's a bad thing. 5e shouldn't be 4e version two any more than it should be 1e v.2 or 3e v.2. Especially since the changes needed to make the game replicate one make would make it incompatible with other games. And, since there's already a 4th Edition available in stores why make a new version of 4th edition? Just play 4th edition. Or Dungeon Command.