D&D 5E 5e isn't a Golden Age of D&D Lorewise, it's Silver at best.

[teitan]

Well in 5E's defense, we technically haven't gotten a FRCS for the current edition. And SCAG is barely a primo choice for that because of its reputation and what not.

It’s reputation with pre-existing fans. I’ve yet to meet new players who don’t like the SCAG.

 

[Micah Sweet]

By definition fictional history IS meaningless.

Hard disagree. Every fantasy author creates their own fictional history, and each has its own truth and meaning. Fictional means not reality. It demonstrably does NOT mean meaningless.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If they could get past Chapter 4 without dying of boredom.

It's a useful reference for those who live in the pre-Google age, but good grief it's dull if you try to read it cover-to-cover. Why would a player ever care that Turmish exports glass and salt?! It's chock full of completely useless information.

Personally I love that stuff. I've sat down and read the 3e FRCS and Aurora's Whole Realms Catalogue cover to cover and enjoyed every minute of it. To each their own. I guessing you're not a big fan of the Silmarillion either.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It’s reputation with pre-existing fans. I’ve yet to meet new players who don’t like the SCAG.

When SCAG came out, pretty much all we had were pre-existing fans.

 

[teitan]

I will say, in the spirit of the OP, I have seen a seeming shift in the conversation regarding 5e over the past...year, perhaps two years at most.

That is, up until a year or two ago, it was strange to go more than a few months without someone gushing over 5e, showering it with praise and adulation. I personally found such threads quite tedious, and thus stayed far away. But I noticed their presence. Obviously such threads were very common when 5e first came out so people were all jumping on the bandwagon as it were, but even after they died down, they remained pretty steady for quite a while. As stated, if more than a couple months went by without a thread like that, it was a surprise.

And then, they seemed to slow and stop. Obviously it's hard to notice an absence, but as I said, over the past year or two it seems like people have shifted their attitude about 5e. It's no longer all sunshine and rainbows and puppies for everyone and eternal sugar-frosted happiness for all. There's a certain....I wouldn't call it "disillusionment," that's much too strong, but perhaps "chagrin"? Maybe it would be better to say the honeymoon has well and truly worn off, and the day-to-day foibles and the chafe of certain restrictions has begun to show. I don't think it's at all a coincidence that things like Level Up and other, similar projects (as well as rumors about a "50th anniversary" update etc., which we know have since been soft-confirmed) started gaining traction around this time.

5e's golden dawn has faded. Plenty of people still obviously love it, not at all trying to imply otherwise. But I'm not seeing that outrightly effusive "ermahGERD I just HAVE to talk about how AWESOME this is" stance anymore. Some folks are criticizing changes in art direction (y'know, that tedious brouhaha we had recently.) Some are criticizing the mechanics. Some, as noted, chafe under the restrictions of the rules that exist, wanting more options or more customization or more depth, etc.

Whether 5e is the "silver age" of D&D or not, I don't know. I don't personally think the "gold/silver/bronze/dark/etc." age terminology is particularly effective, but who knows? But I think we have hit the silver age of 5e individually. The gold hour has faded to the silver light of day, and some folks have noticed a bit of tarnish here and there.

A forum is a vocal minority, but everything does indeed come to a close and some “problems” with 5e have “emerged” with the influx of new players and fans.

1: there are people who think 5e is a game that needs “fixing” and posting long winded YouTube videos about how they’re “tired of fixing 5e” and encouraging people to check out Pathfinder 2e. Cool game, no joke, but the click bait titles have given an impression that has spread virally. These sorts of things ignore that what they are talking about is the home brew friendly design goals of the original 5e developers.

Pf2e is a very slickly designed game and allows for some deep gameplay that 5e does indeed lack but it isn’t a pick and play type of game.

2: WOtC has in the last two years been making some weird choices such as MotM being a reprint book of monsters printed in two books that sold extremely well and were very well received and essentially erasing the lore from DDB if you had not purchase the two books beforehand when they removed them from the app. The book is certainly fine and all but it was a questionable decision. Plus the iterative implementation of changes to races rather than just rolling it out in MotM are just two examples of questionable publishing decisions. The third being the format of Spelljammer and it’s price on DDB compared to similar content sourcebooks that are less expensive. Weakens faith in the brand.

3: burn out. Yep the game may fade in popularity though I doubt it will be as massive as the 2e cliff dive. People will move onto other games naturally. I called this a few years ago and people mocked me for it but Paizo is set up to be the players whose tide rises as those who don’t quit entirely look elsewhere for a more robust design and this is evidenced in PF2e starting to trend and the low cost of the pocket editions making it inexpensive to try out. People can cite Roll20 stats all they want but they only tell you so much about Pathfinder since it isn’t supported very well on the platform like it was on Foundry. D&D and similar systems will always kind of rule the roost in TTRPG followed by horror. Honestly I think the revised edition will quell the storm a little but it certainly feels like some of it was D&D trying to play catch up with Pathfinder with their versatile “ancestry/lineage” design and the new focus on feat design. I am not shocked some of them read almost like multiclassing options with different benefits at higher levels. Before the revision PF2e will see an uptick, after the revision a dip. 6 months will determine is the changes are enough to stem the burn out but 5e is already a strong system.

4: influencers. 5e is THE game. Influencers are taking hits left and right in all media as people expect a level of perfection and it’s a generally toxic environment and I am NOT talking about the dreaded cancel culture buzzword so please don’t think I am. Controversy breeds attention and eventually negative attention rubs off on everyone, good and bad through association. When people are talking about themselves as a brand and minimizing damage it makes the whole scene look bad. I don’t need plastic people as ambassadors for the game. Critical Role. Joe Manganiello. Vin Diesel. Stephen Colbert. Sure. They might play a character but they also know when to turn it off.

5: Satanic Panic Party. It’s back baby and it’s angry.

 

[teitan]

When SCAG came out, pretty much all we had were pre-existing fans.

And now virtually all it is is new fans. And even then it was very well reviewed overall back then.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And now virtually all it is is new fans. And even then it was very well reviewed overall back then.

So you're saying that later on, pre-existing fans decided they didn't like it? Even if that's true, SCAG was the only player-facing supplement for 5e for a good while. You liked it or you went without.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

And now virtually all it is is new fans. And even then it was very well reviewed overall back then.

That wasn't my experience. As someone critical of 5e, I was pretty shocked at how negative the response to SCAG was. Like I said, the vast majority of stuff people said about 5e back then was gushing effusive praise, so having anything even lukewarm was a noticeable drop...and SCAG got a lot more than mere lukewarm responses. It had outright criticism. Sure, it wasn't a pervasive "everyone hates it," but in the context of a time where it felt like everyone thought WotC could do no wrong, it stuck out.

 

[teitan]

So you're saying that later on, pre-existing fans decided they didn't like it? Even if that's true, SCAG was the only player-facing supplement for 5e for a good while. You liked it or you went without.

I’m saying Internet forums are a vocal minority. That’s what I’m saying.

 

[teitan]

That wasn't my experience. As someone critical of 5e, I was pretty shocked at how negative the response to SCAG was. Like I said, the vast majority of stuff people said about 5e back then was gushing effusive praise, so having anything even lukewarm was a noticeable drop...and SCAG got a lot more than mere lukewarm responses. It had outright criticism. Sure, it wasn't a pervasive "everyone hates it," but in the context of a time where it felt like everyone thought WotC could do no wrong, it stuck out.

See above.