Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9368496" data-attributes="member: 7045806">For full disclosure I've played 6 different system, 5e being one of them, in the last 12 months. I think the hobby has a lot to offer a lot of people. OSR variants like Mork, and Shadowdark are great. Dolmenwood looks amazing as well. Pathfinder 2e has so many options, and has a super elegant design with incredibly balanced math. Call of Cthulhu is a ton of fun and super stressful. 13th age has really a neat take on combat.My issue is only the lengths people go to bash on a system. 5e is continually prosecuted for being &quot;bad.&quot; Such as statements like &quot;5e is only popular because it's players don't try other systems.&quot; Statements that are constructed and contrary to the evidence we see.This happens a lot. And it happens while people propose sweeping changes to the system. It happens while, in this very thread, people get called out for not wanting to change the system.My issue is not me feeling prosecuted for my choice. I play such a breadth of systems with a bunch of great people. My issue is the logical leaps people will go through to explain 5e's popularity because it &quot;cant be because the system is good.&quot;Occam's razor is an idea that, if you have two competing ideas to explain the same phenomenon, you should prefer the simpler one. I propose that 5e being good is a far easier explaination than the ignorance of it's player base.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DinoInDisguise, post: 9368496, member: 7045806"] For full disclosure I've played 6 different system, 5e being one of them, in the last 12 months. I think the hobby has a lot to offer a lot of people. OSR variants like Mork, and Shadowdark are great. Dolmenwood looks amazing as well. Pathfinder 2e has so many options, and has a super elegant design with incredibly balanced math. Call of Cthulhu is a ton of fun and super stressful. 13th age has really a neat take on combat. My issue is only the lengths people go to bash on a system. 5e is continually prosecuted for being "bad." Such as statements like "5e is only popular because it's players don't try other systems." Statements that are constructed and contrary to the evidence we see. This happens a lot. And it happens while people propose sweeping changes to the system. It happens while, in this very thread, people get called out for not wanting to change the system. My issue is not me feeling prosecuted for my choice. I play such a breadth of systems with a bunch of great people. My issue is the logical leaps people will go through to explain 5e's popularity because it "cant be because the system is good." Occam's razor is an idea that, if you have two competing ideas to explain the same phenomenon, you should prefer the simpler one. I propose that 5e being good is a far easier explaination than the ignorance of it's player base. [/QUOTE]

Verification