See, this just reads as demanding everyone start from your point of view. That's it's bad to skip to the punchline without detailed explanation to a rigor you set if the position differs from yours. It's a strange thing to demand, and comes across as insisting people honor your predilictions while giving you permission to dismiss theirs. Thing is, this is a discussion forum -- not everyone is posting from the same place. This kind of gatekeeping, and it is a mild gatekeeping of the purity of group kind, is much more harmful if embraced than you having to roll your eyes and scroll past a post or four. I'm here to discuss ganes, seek advice, and interact with different viewpoints. I do not wish your brand of purity controls on the discussion. I want people to suggest other games. I'm still playing 5e despite occasionally having to confront such suggestions, and, heck, even after making such suggestions myself. I don't need a safe space from suggestions of other games.
In short, you're suggesting everyone just agree with you, and, if you don't, a detailed list of why you don't must be provided. Nah.
You are stretching really far to get to a conclusion that makes no sense.
I am demanding no such thing. Quite the opposite, in fact. I am suggesting to folks that they should remember that their experience isn’t universal when responding to an advice thread.
Telling someone that D&D “can’t” do heists, or can’t do it well, and they should either play D&D without heists or play a heist specific game, is assuming that your experience is universal and objective, and they’re wrong to think they might have a different experience from you.
Different groups want different things from horror, or heists, or mystery, or fairy tales, and have different gameplay, mechanical, and complexity, preferences.
Hussar has never gotten D&D to do naval combat in a way that they were remotely satisfied with. I, and at least one other person ITT, have. Neither of us is wrong about our experiences, we just want different things from naval combat, and expect different things when modeling something in a TTRPG.
If I started a thread about running naval combat in 5e D&D, and he came in and dropped “D&D doesnt do that. Play something else.” At best, that is a completely useless comment that gives me absolutely nothing.
If another person suggest another game, and notes what it does to facilitate enjoyable naval combat, and why they like it, that is useful information.
If a third person comes in and says, “I’ve tried that and it sucked” and gives some amount of further information about why they feel 5e sucks at naval combat, they’ve actually given advice. I don’t have to take their advice in order to appreciate it, but I can compare it to what my group enjoys, prioritizes, dislikes, etc, and there are several ways I can then usefully interact with that advice.
I can ask clarifying questions.
I can look into the mechanics of the game they or someone else suggests as an alternative, with an eye to avoiding specific problems I’ve been warned of.
I can ask the thread if anyone has had the same problems and found a solution that worked for them.
Expecting someone to just take your word for it, when you are an Internet stranger who has never played with them or their group, is completely ridiculous, and presumptuous.
For the hundredth time; how you communicate is more likely to determine whether you are being rude or otherwise disrespectful than what you communicate, and giving “advise” that amounts to “don’t question me I know better than you” is both useless and dismissive of the person asking for advise.
