Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9438529" data-attributes="member: 18">This is believable to me, because one of the first things I called 5E was &quot;Alternate reality 3E&quot;.5E, whilst incorporating lessons and ideas from 3E and 4E (less from the latter - though that is increasing with 2024), basically seemed like a different way 3E could have gone, rather than a true derivation from those later editions.But I don't think WotC actually are targeting 2E DMs or anything. Rather, they crafted an &quot;apology edition&quot; designed to appeal particularly to people who used to play 2E/3E (and to some smaller extent 1E), but lapsed, and also to avoid horribly offending 4E DMs/players so much they didn't play it.And they succeeded, by and large - not without faults, not without faults, but this was I think the most &quot;broadly&quot; aimed D&amp;D since 2E. Yes they wanted 2E people back, but they particularly wanted 3E/PF1 players and 4E players as well (and probably 1E if they could get them). And in the process of doing this, they made a D&amp;D that's more accessible/easier to engage with than really any other AD&amp;D-derivation, which largely accidentally set 5E up for far more massive success than anticipated.It's important to remember - they didn't plan for success with 5E really. They planned it as a contingency to keep D&amp;D going - D&amp;D had failed to pass the bar that had been set by Hasbro for 4E, which is why 5E was given a lower budget and seen as a small project (which is also why they took the approach to book releases that they did). This is also probably what caused Hasbro/WotC management to allow them to bring back the OGL etc., after insisting on the awful and damaging GSL for 4E.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 9438529, member: 18"] This is believable to me, because one of the first things I called 5E was "Alternate reality 3E". 5E, whilst incorporating lessons and ideas from 3E and 4E (less from the latter - though that is increasing with 2024), basically seemed like a different way 3E could have gone, rather than a true derivation from those later editions. But I don't think WotC actually are targeting 2E DMs or anything. Rather, they crafted an "apology edition" designed to appeal particularly to people who used to play 2E/3E (and to some smaller extent 1E), but lapsed, and also to avoid horribly offending 4E DMs/players so much they didn't play it. And they succeeded, by and large - not without faults, not without faults, but this was I think the most "broadly" aimed D&D since 2E. Yes they wanted 2E people back, but they particularly wanted 3E/PF1 players and 4E players as well (and probably 1E if they could get them). And in the process of doing this, they made a D&D that's more accessible/easier to engage with than really any other AD&D-derivation, which largely accidentally set 5E up for far more massive success than anticipated. It's important to remember - they didn't plan for success with 5E really. They planned it as a contingency to keep D&D going - D&D had failed to pass the bar that had been set by Hasbro for 4E, which is why 5E was given a lower budget and seen as a small project (which is also why they took the approach to book releases that they did). This is also probably what caused Hasbro/WotC management to allow them to bring back the OGL etc., after insisting on the awful and damaging GSL for 4E. [/QUOTE]

Verification