D&D General Chris just said why I hate wizard/fighter dynamic

[Aldarc]

What's your point? The core concepts work for a lot of people. That base system and style was carried over first into PF and then 5E. The majority of people currently playing 5E have never heard of PF and don't really care much about the history of D&D one way or another. They just have fun playing the game, to me that's all that matters.

Any good reader could have discerned my point that D&D was the market leader as it was effectively both the #1 and #2 spot. Saying that D&D wasn't the market leader misses the forest for the trees. Need me to spell anything else out for you while I am at it?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Any good reader could have discerned my point that D&D was the market leader as it was effectively both the #1 and #2 spot. Saying that D&D wasn't the market leader misses the forest for the trees. Need me to spell anything else out for you while I am at it?

Mod Note:

You’re insulting someone’s reading comprehension to open AND being condescending to close. That’s not even close to being civil. Knock it off.

 

[Jaeger]

When 5E was released, D&D was not the market leader.

And?

This refutes nothing of what I was talking about.

Understanding the whole 4e-5e situation can be explained by extrapolating from what I have already posted.

WotC committed an own goal with 4e: They split the player base. (This is that part in my post where I said that: "The market leader has to make a huge mistake that alienates the fanbase, ...")

But because people are used to D&D and still wanted to play D&D, they gravitated to the clone which was offered as D&D under another name. Which was actually a kind of double edged sword for Pazio; as it elevated them to the #2 RPG company, but also kept a huge portion of the "D&D" player network active...

People are very loyal to "name" Brands. ("geek" IP fans are very long suffering...) Permanent damage to the brand Identity of D&D was not yet done.

WotC realized and corrected their error before irreparable damage was done to their player network. i.e. (They were not "incompetent enough, long enough, for you Pazio to take a big enough chunk out of their market share...")

The minute 5e came out, and was discerned to be "D&D": The overwhelming majority of the player base re-united once again under the "official" D&D brand name. This was aided by the fact that even when 4e was released 3.5 was seen as an increasingly unwieldly edition in play, and the clone did not fix any of its underlying issues...

(Nonetheless a small portion of the player base stayed with the clone, keeping it in the perennial #2 RPG spot.)

This unification gave D&D back the dominant network effect it had previously split with the clone. Which of course returned D&D to a dominant market position where they were able to take advantage of the current pop-culture upswing in D&D's popularity.

As someone who did not play any D&D from the 3e era until last year, I find the whole 4e / Pathfinder kerfluffel absolutely fascinating.

At a certain point, when someone is telling you that you're misunderstanding them, it's simple rudeness to pretend that you're not. Please don't do that anymore.

I have replied to every point that you have made explaining why I believe your arguments to be incorrect.

I can do nothing about the fact that you persist in believing that my points are irrelevant.

then we've established that they're not relevant.

No "we" here.

If after 3 increasingly detailed posts you still do see the relevance of my replies, then it is clear there is nothing further I can possibly say to elucidate you.

 

[Mordhau]

I have replied to every point that you have made explaining why I believe your arguments to be incorrect.

No at this point you're just gaslighting.

 

[Mordhau]

If people want to continue this derailment about why D&D is the most popular game could someone just start a new thread?

 

[Oofta]

And?

This refutes nothing of what I was talking about.

Understanding the whole 4e-5e situation can be explained by extrapolating from what I have already posted.

WotC committed an own goal with 4e: They split the player base. (This is that part in my post where I said that: "The market leader has to make a huge mistake that alienates the fanbase, ...")

But because people are used to D&D and still wanted to play D&D, they gravitated to the clone which was offered as D&D under another name. Which was actually a kind of double edged sword for Pazio; as it elevated them to the #2 RPG company, but also kept a huge portion of the "D&D" player network active...

People are very loyal to "name" Brands. ("geek" IP fans are very long suffering...) Permanent damage to the brand Identity of D&D was not yet done.

WotC realized and corrected their error before irreparable damage was done to their player network. i.e. (They were not "incompetent enough, long enough, for you Pazio to take a big enough chunk out of their market share...")

The minute 5e came out, and was discerned to be "D&D": The overwhelming majority of the player base re-united once again under the "official" D&D brand name. This was aided by the fact that even when 4e was released 3.5 was seen as an increasingly unwieldly edition in play, and the clone did not fix any of its underlying issues...

(Nonetheless a small portion of the player base stayed with the clone, keeping it in the perennial #2 RPG spot.)

This unification gave D&D back the dominant network effect it had previously split with the clone. Which of course returned D&D to a dominant market position where they were able to take advantage of the current pop-culture upswing in D&D's popularity.

As someone who did not play any D&D from the 3e era until last year, I find the whole 4e / Pathfinder kerfluffel absolutely fascinating.




I have replied to every point that you have made explaining why I believe your arguments to be incorrect.

I can do nothing about the fact that you persist in believing that my points are irrelevant.



No "we" here.

If after 3 increasingly detailed posts you still do see the relevance of my replies, then it is clear there is nothing further I can possibly say to elucidate you.

If you count Pathfinder as D&D then D&D has always been and continues to be the best selling TTRPG for the past half century. You don't maintain that kind of longevity with bad game core concepts, even if they have evolved over time. It's not the name that makes it popular, although that is part of it. I played 4E but if 5E had not been released I wouldn't have continued to playing D&D after my last campaign ended. In addition the growth of D&D 5E would not be possible if it was a bad game.

I get tired of people seeming to crap on a game I enjoy, that millions of people enjoy, and making excuses for why we're somehow wrong for enjoying the game. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Minigiant]

I get tired of people seeming to crap on a game I enjoy, that millions of people enjoy, and making excuses for why we're somehow wrong for enjoying the game. That's all I'm saying.

We can still criticize 5e for its perceived mistakes, right?

What I am tired of is people in the "geek fandom" of various things claiming something is beyond criticism just because its the most popular.

There wouldn't be so many fighter topics, so many "magic fighter" official subclasseses, so many fighter homebrews, and a whole level up side system if the 5e Fighter was perfect.

There is clearly some issue a significant portion of the fanbase see or saw. Especially in post 10th level play. It's not pretend or fake.

 

[FrogReaver]

We can still criticize 5e for its perceived mistakes, right?

IMO. Calling someones preferred mechanic/system/class/etc a mistake seems like it won't ever come across right. Maybe leave it at - for me and many other D&D players the Fighter doesn't work well for us, especially after level 10.

What I am tired of is people in the "geek fandom" of various things claiming something is beyond criticism just because its the most popular.

I agree with the sentiment but that's not the claim I'm hearing here.

There wouldn't be so many fighter topics, so many "magic fighter" official subclasseses, so many fighter homebrews, and a whole level up side system if the 5e Fighter was perfect.

There is clearly some issue a significant portion of the fanbase see or saw. Especially in post 10th level play. It's not pretend or fake.

There is no perfect. No matter what gets put out there will be fights about it because when it comes to one game, one edition, not everyone can always get what they want.

And I fully agree that based on my experience and analysis most martials post level 10 tend to start falling behind. But there's so much left up to the DM that it's really impossible to say this will be true for everyones game.

 

[Oofta]

We can still criticize 5e for its perceived mistakes, right?

What I am tired of is people in the "geek fandom" of various things claiming something is beyond criticism just because its the most popular.

There wouldn't be so many fighter topics, so many "magic fighter" official subclasseses, so many fighter homebrews, and a whole level up side system if the 5e Fighter was perfect.

There is clearly some issue a significant portion of the fanbase see or saw. Especially in post 10th level play. It's not pretend or fake.

I have never said 5E was beyond criticism. But there's a difference between dismissing people liking it and claiming it's only popular because of tradition.

As far as complaints, people will always find fault. Nothing is perfect. But millions of people aren't happily playing a game that is broken.

 

[Guest 7034872]

I have never said 5E was beyond criticism. But there's a difference between dismissing people liking it and claiming it's only popular because of tradition.

As far as complaints, people will always find fault. Nothing is perfect. But millions of people aren't happily playing a game that is broken.

You know, I've learned some real humility just from trying to "fix" things I was so sure were "broken." Per the law of unintended consequences, the majority of my intended improvements in the long run only made things worse.

My dad taught me this a long, long time ago: there will always be a lot of geniuses in the room so long as they themselves don't have to live by the changes they make.