The "I Didn't Comment in Another Thread" Thread

[Snarf Zagyg]

(Those were great threads.)

They were great threads! But some of us may have more ... mixed emotions ... about them.

 

[Evaniel]

They were great threads! But some of us may have more ... mixed emotions ... about them.

TBF, I don't think I read some of the latter day ones, so I'm sure I'm missing some vital context.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Hey ... speaking obliquely of those threads by CleverNickName ... you know what I just realized...

This is the Ten Thousandth Snarf Post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Scribe]

Annnnnnnnd its already getting turned into another 4e thread.

 

[overgeeked]

I genuinely want to respond to your thread about running a 4e campaign using Essentials only. I found the Essentials books to be delightful and would love to engage on that topic. However, I see the usual suspects have flooded in and have already fired edition war shots. So, .

That's what "+" threads are for.

I don't want to be Conspiracy Guy and/or assume intent, but I can't help but wonder if the current New Meta is an attempt to influence the direction of ONE/NEXT/5.5. By my count, it's less than half-a-dozen posters really going hard.

My pattern-seeking monkey brain can't help but try to get at the "why" of it. I've been lurking for 20 years now, but I've mostly been enjoying it here enough in the last year or so to want to post again. But this month has been bananas.

If it is a conspiracy, it's an incredibly bad one. The time to influence the player-facing bits of the revision is past. Better to have started a decade ago, when 5E was fresh and new. Better to have started once ONE D&D was announced. Better to have started when the player-facing playtest packets were being released. Better to have started when the player-facing surveys were ahead of us rather than behind. Sure, there was one player-facing survey in the last month. But that was wildly too late to try to actually influence the revisions. It's far more likely that several people are having similar thoughts and honestly wanting to talk about them...and they just happen to be hitting around the same time.

 

[Mannahnin]

That's what "+" threads are for.

Didn't we just have a mod correction/clarification on this, because someone made a thread "+" which wasn't in bounds for those?

 

[overgeeked]

Didn't we just have a mod correction/clarification on this, because someone made a thread "+" which wasn't in bounds for those?

News to me. Do you have a link?

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'll bump it up a bit in the queue, then.

Normally I wait until the chatter and discussion quiets down on one before I move to the other. But I wasn't prepared for such an enthusiastic response to PbtA. I ended up dropping another one a tad early as a distraction, hoping to keep a couple of folks from getting that thread locked.

It wasn't a coincidence that I stayed the heck out of that one.

 

[prabe]

News to me. Do you have a link?

This one--presented without argument or commentary.

https://www.enworld.org/threads/the-importance-of-verisimilitude-or-why-you-dont-need-realism-to-keep-it-real.700215/

 

[Gradine]