Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jacob Lewis" data-source="post: 9779907" data-attributes="member: 6667921">Thanks for sharing this! I see now that I have more in common with you than I thought. I’m also very much a G person — though equally drawn to RP. I loved 4E because it offered that sense of deliberate, tactical decision-making where every move mattered. It wasn’t a perfect system, but it knew what kind of game it wanted to be. I still think it’s unfortunate that it never had the chance to evolve or find new life through an SRD or OGL the way other editions did.That, to me, ties into a broader tension with D&D itself. When a game tries to be a home for every playstyle, it stops signaling clearly what experience it’s designed to deliver. Games like this depend on some level of consensus among players — not just about the rules, but about what kind of play those rules are meant to facilitate. If everyone comes to the table expecting to play “their game, their way,” the session becomes a series of compromises rather than a shared rhythm. It’s even harder in open or public tables, where people meet for the first time and those assumptions never align.Of course, finding compromise and agreement within a group isn’t always a struggle. Sometimes you find people you naturally click with despite differences; other times you mesh because your playstyles align. And occasionally, it just doesn’t work out — which is fine. We figure that out through experience and interaction. These games depend on a social contract, so it’s expected that we adjust to one another and negotiate that space together.But that isn’t a systemic issue; it’s a social one. And I’d hesitate to even call it a problem, because the willingness to compromise, include, and adapt is part of being a decent person. It’s not always easy, though. We often turn to rules or systems for guidance — sometimes to provide structure, sometimes to remove the burden of making decisions that won’t satisfy everyone. That’s why so many people, like we’re doing now, discuss ways to make play smoother or more engaging. But just like finding the right people for the right table, these ideas aren’t universally applicable. They’re tools for those who find them useful, not standards for others to follow.</blockquote>

Verification