Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8201790" data-attributes="member: 16814">Your step 3 on is an imaginative strawman, though.&nbsp; What usually happens is that someone points out that system Y does&nbsp; concept X well already, without additional work, and may be worth looking at.&nbsp; Or, also likely, that 5e lacks any real support for X, but system Y is made to do that.That people stick to 5e anyway is true, though, and one should examine why that may be -- it's not because 5e does X well or that you can do a lot or work or ignore 5e's system to get there.&nbsp; It's usually some other thing or things.&nbsp; There's a cost to learning a new system.&nbsp; There's sunk cost fallacies for remaining with 5e.&nbsp; There's the quite likely situation that it's hard to find players for anything but 5e.&nbsp; There's inertia and avoidance of change (not bad things, just things).&nbsp; It's never because 5e is actually the right or best system to do concept X.As for the last bits, it's fair to complain that if you really want to stick to 5e and cobble together an approach that does X, it's less helpful to get responses that suggest game Y.&nbsp; There are threads on this board, though, that start by explicitly saying exactly this and the pretty much avoid any such suggestions.&nbsp; If this is your desire, I suggest this approach.That said, a number of those threads don't go anywhere successful even when looking at only 5e suggestions.&nbsp; This is because 5e (or any system) is actually limited in what it can do by it's core system.&nbsp; 5e cannot really do the kind of things a PbtA game does (and vice versa) because the core systems are very different and focus on completely different outcomes of play.&nbsp; I can (and sometimes do) smuggle in things from other games into 5e, but I'm very aware that when I do this, I'm ignoring 5e's system at that time, and I don't credit 5e for being flexible and enabling that play when I do so.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8201790, member: 16814"] Your step 3 on is an imaginative strawman, though. What usually happens is that someone points out that system Y does concept X well already, without additional work, and may be worth looking at. Or, also likely, that 5e lacks any real support for X, but system Y is made to do that. That people stick to 5e anyway is true, though, and one should examine why that may be -- it's not because 5e does X well or that you can do a lot or work or ignore 5e's system to get there. It's usually some other thing or things. There's a cost to learning a new system. There's sunk cost fallacies for remaining with 5e. There's the quite likely situation that it's hard to find players for anything but 5e. There's inertia and avoidance of change (not bad things, just things). It's never because 5e is actually the right or best system to do concept X. As for the last bits, it's fair to complain that if you really want to stick to 5e and cobble together an approach that does X, it's less helpful to get responses that suggest game Y. There are threads on this board, though, that start by explicitly saying exactly this and the pretty much avoid any such suggestions. If this is your desire, I suggest this approach. That said, a number of those threads don't go anywhere successful even when looking at only 5e suggestions. This is because 5e (or any system) is actually limited in what it can do by it's core system. 5e cannot really do the kind of things a PbtA game does (and vice versa) because the core systems are very different and focus on completely different outcomes of play. I can (and sometimes do) smuggle in things from other games into 5e, but I'm very aware that when I do this, I'm ignoring 5e's system at that time, and I don't credit 5e for being flexible and enabling that play when I do so. [/QUOTE]

Verification