Recent content by Micah Sweet

I never said my opinion changed WotC's ability to decide what gets called D&D. I just disagree with them.

True, no matter how many others there are. And comparing me to a flat-earther is just insulting.

Fair enough. Obviously I see it differently.

To me, 2e, 3e, 4e, and 5e are not compatible to each other (and therefore IMO should be called something other than Dungeons & Dragons). 2e and it's antecedents, 3e, 3.5 and the 3e 3pps, 4e and Essentials, and 5e, 5.5 and the 5e 3pps are all compatible enough with each other in their group to...

Yup. That's all the story I want out of an RPG.

Ok. I don't know everything, obviously. What do you mean?

How is your opinion less biased than mine? Because it's more positive? Because theoretically more people agree with you? I don't think so.

The only one of those games I know well enough to have an opinion on is L5R, and the four editions made by AEG are all broadly compatible with each other. I know because I've done it. Even the WotC version has rules for the second edition of the AEG game. The other games with that name were made...

I am not the only person who sees the WotC editions as different games. I guarantee it.

Traveller games all by the same company? If so, fair enough. MERP has a completely different name than Rolemaster. Not familiar with HeroQuest. What's the (argument)?

Good one. I'll concede there's another WotC out there, albeit for minis games rather than RPGs. GW has always been the WotC of minis games anyway.

I agree. 2e and 3e are definitely different games, just like 3e, 4e, and 5e are all different games.

Yeah, if RAW doesn't make sense to me, I just change the rules.

Sure, but I can't speak from anyone else's perspective than my own, and neither can you. Can you give me an example of incompatible game editions from someone other than WotC? Preferably by the same company.

Like what?