D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Incenjucar]

Sure.

The issue is, they think that the company has no right to produce stuff they don’t like, and should continue to cater solely to their tastes forever.

Mischaracterization is not helpful.

Nobody is calling for a lawsuit against Hasbro nor calling the police on them.

Nobody is demanding exclusivity.

Some people would like to ALSO have their tastes catered to, whether or not that is a financially sound action or something WotC has the right designers for.

 

[Remathilis]

maybe thats because B2 + Moldvay is rules and adventure in harmony while 2E Ravenloft is like eating soup with a fork?

I guess the metaphor was a bit too cute by half. I don't literally mean I want new Ravenloft material from an OSR. But the OSR movement ignores the story/narrative style of play that Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms and Ravenloft and is interested in the late 70s/early 80s vibes over the late 80s and 90 vibes. For me, OS play feels more like that than anything Gary ever did, but there is little OSR support for that.

 

[The Firebird]

Sure.

The issue is, they think that the company has no right to produce stuff they don’t like, and should continue to cater solely to their tastes forever.

Who is the 'they' you are thinking of here? Are there folks who have posted in this thread that have this attitude? What specifically?

 

[Incenjucar]

I find it helpful to break out specific components of editions rather than taking them as a whole. 2E has that vast and creative lore to it that has the capacity to be mostly rules-agnostic as long as there are sufficient analogues. 3E has a wealth of character ideas of varying execution which certainly must be adapted to new rules but which are still fascinating experiments. OE dungeon crawls can fit any given narrative background, and work fine with any given action structure, but require certain limitations to allow for risk-reward play.

 

[Alzrius]

I noticed that (it’s a 3.5 clone) but that doesn’t affect the point that there are a great many 5e clones out in the wild - probably more than any other edition.

I disagree with you there, largely because there's an awful lot of 3.X/d20 Modern-derived stand-alone RPGs that aren't labeled as "clones" despite being adaptations of the system (many of which only had a small number of supplements produced for them; sometimes the core rulebook was the only product made).

 

[payn]

I noticed that (it’s a 3.5 clone) but that doesn’t affect the point that there are a great many 5e clones out in the wild - probably more than any other edition.

I took it as D&D being just a stand in for all of fantasy RPG.

 

[mamba]

Who said 1e? Certainly not me.

no, the post you replied to was talking about the OSR and your reply was ‘here is a game that does exactly what you want, why don’t you play that instead of 5e, but no it must come from WotC’. I assumed that was in reference to the OSR, but yeah you could have meant that generically

Good grief, how many 5e D&D versions are there right now? Level Up, Tales of the Valiant, Pathfinder... the list is endless.

If you honestly cannot find a version of D&D that suits you, that's on you.

ToV is very close to 2014, so is 2024. A5e is probably the most different out of the 5Es.

I’d probably go with Shadow of the Weird Wizard personally, which is not really a 5e but pretty closely related. I am definitely curious about Mike Mearls’ take. From what I have seen he aligns very well with what I want.

 

[Minigiant]

Who is the 'they' you are thinking of here? Are there folks who have posted in this thread that have this attitude? What specifically?

Not in ENworld because ENWorlders are mostly level headed.

But out in the world, there are many with a high visible platform who are are upset that they aren't the main target audience and think WOTC would make enough profit with them as it if they were with no evidence and proof of the contrary.

 

[The Firebird]

Not in ENworld because ENWorlders are mostly level headed.

But out in the world, there are many with a high visible platform who are are upset that they aren't the main target audience and think WOTC would make enough profit with them as it if they were with no evidence and proof of the contrary.

I agree it doesn't characterize the posters here. I don't think it is constructive to set up a vague population of people who don't frequent the forum as wrong or flawed. At best they are unable to respond. At worst it's just another strawman.

 

[Mind of tempest]

See, now, if that was the general gist of the criticisms that we saw in that giant thread about Mariliths, then, fine. No problem. But, that wasn't what was being complained about. It was, at least in the majority of criticisms, endless kvetching about the marilith not having boobs. That Mariliths were usually pictured as decidedly female and this new art wasn't decidedly female, thus it was bad.

Or something to that effect.

"I want the art to be more evocative. I want mariliths to be (insert adjectives and description here)" is a FANTASTIC topic and one I'd love to participate in. "We've always had cheesesnake art for mariliths and I want my snake boobs back" is just exhausting. Particularly since that's a drum that's been beaten pretty much non-stop for over a decade now.

should I make the thread?