Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 9198553" data-attributes="member: 22779"><img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937.png" title="Person shrugging    :person_shrugging:" data-shortname=":person_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" />The fact that every criticism of 4e applies to 5e yet vanished in the haze tells me that people weren’t bothered all that much. Heck, upthread Celebrim goes on at length about how it was the conversation around 4e and not really 4e itself that was the problem. All those lovely “discussions “ about how as meat or disociated mechanics or lore changes or on and on all vanished. Even though they are still just as present in 5e. So no I don’t believe that the issues with 4e had much to do with 4e as a game. If it was then 5e would be just as objectionable as 4e. Meh. It really doesn’t matter. This is such a lost cause. Ten years later it still stings but I’ve pretty much accepted that it was what it was. I just think it’s a real shame that the primary lesson learned from 4e is that WotC now holds fandom at as far as an arms length as it can. But considering how everything they said would be twisted into the absolute most negative way possible I can’t really blame them.</blockquote>