Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
cancelled 5e announcement at Gencon??? Anyone know anything about this?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wrecan" data-source="post: 5662572" data-attributes="member: 64825"><p>No I'm not. I am not comparing cancer and D&D. I am comparing the logic behind the arguments.</p><p></p><p>"I did not experience a problem with X. Therefore I see no reason to change X" </p><p></p><p>That's the statement with which I am taking issue. The issue is the same no matter what X is. It can be "linear fighters, quadrtic wizards". It can be "THAC0". It can be "cigarettes causing cancer". It can be "Windows crashes whenever I try to install this update". </p><p></p><p>The problem with the argument (not the subject of the argument) is the same. The arguer is stating (perhaps without meaning to) that because they personally didn't experience the problem, it should not be changed. Chances are, what they mean is "I understand others have this problem, but for me and my playstyle, I prefer the system as was to the systems as it is changed to fix this perceived problem." But what it sounds like is "Since I didn't experience it, I don't believe the people complaining about it did either."</p><p></p><p>The problem can also be portrayed in the reverse in the edition war. A 4e defender could say (and I have seen it been said) that "I never had a problem with disassociated mechanics. I see no reason to design a game without them." Such a person is essentially denying that anybody could have a genuine problem with disassociated mechanics, this diminishing everybody who has expressed such a problem. Such statements are not helpful, not substantive, and entirely condescending.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wrecan, post: 5662572, member: 64825"] No I'm not. I am not comparing cancer and D&D. I am comparing the logic behind the arguments. "I did not experience a problem with X. Therefore I see no reason to change X" That's the statement with which I am taking issue. The issue is the same no matter what X is. It can be "linear fighters, quadrtic wizards". It can be "THAC0". It can be "cigarettes causing cancer". It can be "Windows crashes whenever I try to install this update". The problem with the argument (not the subject of the argument) is the same. The arguer is stating (perhaps without meaning to) that because they personally didn't experience the problem, it should not be changed. Chances are, what they mean is "I understand others have this problem, but for me and my playstyle, I prefer the system as was to the systems as it is changed to fix this perceived problem." But what it sounds like is "Since I didn't experience it, I don't believe the people complaining about it did either." The problem can also be portrayed in the reverse in the edition war. A 4e defender could say (and I have seen it been said) that "I never had a problem with disassociated mechanics. I see no reason to design a game without them." Such a person is essentially denying that anybody could have a genuine problem with disassociated mechanics, this diminishing everybody who has expressed such a problem. Such statements are not helpful, not substantive, and entirely condescending. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
cancelled 5e announcement at Gencon??? Anyone know anything about this?
Top