Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9368234" data-attributes="member: 7045806">Isn't this &quot;problem&quot; much broader. In this thread, there are proposals that radically change the game, and still call it &quot;5e.&quot; Are those proposals running afoul of the same thing? Is there a real difference between saying &quot;Tales of the Valiant isn't 5e,&quot; and saying &quot;something that has granular bonuses akin to 3e is?&quot;Isn't this just projection in both cases? Both camps want their vision of a &quot;good system&quot; to be popular? And since 5e is, indisputably, popular, both camps want their vision to be &quot;5e?&quot; Isn't that why so many propose changing 5e instead of adopting a new system? A thought such as, &quot;If only the community tried the system I want, they'd see the light,&quot; comes to mind.Seems like it to an observer. Seems to me, that a lot of this is about the validation of liking a popular system. The poster you quoted likes 5e as is, with minor fixes. Others want 3e or 4e under a different name. It's all the same. Why is the former a problem, and the latter not? Does a thread about &quot;fixing&quot; a system forbid any opinion that isn't a radical change to the foundation of that system?In my mind, the poster you quoted is closer to the premise of &quot;fixing&quot; when compared to many others who just want another system under the 5e name.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DinoInDisguise, post: 9368234, member: 7045806"] Isn't this "problem" much broader. In this thread, there are proposals that radically change the game, and still call it "5e." Are those proposals running afoul of the same thing? Is there a real difference between saying "Tales of the Valiant isn't 5e," and saying "something that has granular bonuses akin to 3e is?" Isn't this just projection in both cases? Both camps want their vision of a "good system" to be popular? And since 5e is, indisputably, popular, both camps want their vision to be "5e?" Isn't that why so many propose changing 5e instead of adopting a new system? A thought such as, "If only the community tried the system I want, they'd see the light," comes to mind. Seems like it to an observer. Seems to me, that a lot of this is about the validation of liking a popular system. The poster you quoted likes 5e as is, with minor fixes. Others want 3e or 4e under a different name. It's all the same. Why is the former a problem, and the latter not? Does a thread about "fixing" a system forbid any opinion that isn't a radical change to the foundation of that system? In my mind, the poster you quoted is closer to the premise of "fixing" when compared to many others who just want another system under the 5e name. [/QUOTE]

Verification