Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7460763" data-attributes="member: 996">This will be my third attempt at a reply, BTW... if it's terse, it's just frustration with technology...That's a major part of it, IMHO.  It must strike the balance between being acceptable to the old gaurd and accessible to the new.  5e moved back from the level of accessibility 4e presented quite a lot, to get to the level of acceptabilty required (maybe erred on that side more than a bit).  I feel like there is a lot of that going on.  We get so familiar with one game that we become accustomed to how it does things, cope with it's issues automatically, and any difference from it stands out. 'Appeal' is very much that 'culture zietgiest' (there's a come-back in full swing, instead of an edition war, for instance) and shelf presence (the core books are very clearly marked, the supplements are more obscure).  What's between the covers, whether a casual player is aware of it in the kind of hideous detail we discuss it (heaven help him) or not, OTOH, does indirectly impact their play experience, making the game fun or frustrating, exciting or disapointing, engaging or boring.  5e, of course, has returned intentionally to the 1e answer to those potential problems:  load responsibility for the play experience entirely on the DM.  It's called 'Empowerment,' but, with tons of long-time & returning DMs finding 5e quite 'acceptable,' and new DMs getting trained up over time, it's working out quite well. Honestly, I think that would be horrible.  It'd shatter the relatively unified, clear brand-image/shelf-presence (3 core books, only one clearly for a 'Player') that keeps the game from being too intimidating before a potential new player has even tried it.The variation on that which could work would be a 3pp coming out with a game that's built up on 5e using the SRD, as a sort of 'advanced' version - with neither the D&D nor the WotC logos to confuse the potential new players in the mainstream.Paizo could've gone there with PF2.   That 'Expert's Myopia" is exactly why you don't see the dysfunction!   Filler fights, time pressure, gotchyas, anti-magic zones, wrapping campaigns by 15th level?  It's nothing to do with imposing balance & payability, it's just how we've always played the game, it's D&D's own self-defined 'genre.'  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />...and, quick, post before it glitches again...... thank Kibo...it finally worked...Oh, and:  Here's the thing:  thanks to my expertise, it doesn't bother me.  I can have a blast running 5e, because I have the 'mad skillz' from running AD&D all those years.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification