Siberys
Adventurer
[MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION]
I think that question kinda misses the point. I'm sure that there's a point where it'd be better to just run a different game. As a matter of fact, I'm personally past that point myself. But I think the game's tolerance for possible changes is greater than you think, evidently. Perhaps it's because what I think of as D&D is the fluff, things like settings and monsters and art. The rules are a vehicle for that, but aren't D&D all on their own.
Can you imagine a game with 2e's flavor and feel, 3e's customizability, and 4e's rigor? I can, and it is beautiful. We could have had that. Instead we're getting 5e, which sorta meets the first two of those but drags in 3e's problems with things like LFQW and wonky saves. (Plus they're ramming FR down our throats. At least when they did that in 4e with PoLand I found the creation myth interesting.)
I think that question kinda misses the point. I'm sure that there's a point where it'd be better to just run a different game. As a matter of fact, I'm personally past that point myself. But I think the game's tolerance for possible changes is greater than you think, evidently. Perhaps it's because what I think of as D&D is the fluff, things like settings and monsters and art. The rules are a vehicle for that, but aren't D&D all on their own.
Can you imagine a game with 2e's flavor and feel, 3e's customizability, and 4e's rigor? I can, and it is beautiful. We could have had that. Instead we're getting 5e, which sorta meets the first two of those but drags in 3e's problems with things like LFQW and wonky saves. (Plus they're ramming FR down our throats. At least when they did that in 4e with PoLand I found the creation myth interesting.)