Which means we're all equally creative.I mean to be fair we're all building on the work of the designers that came before us all the way back to and preceding Arneson and Gygax.
Ok. I never had anything all that bad to say about the base 5e system. It's pretty solid. But it's development is constrained by the megacorporation that publishes it and its desire for endlessly maximized profit, hence every product needing to be designed to broadly appeal to as many people as possible to meet that goal.I find this argument interesting when most (all) 3pp haven't actually created their own system, but have instead opted to take the work done by the designers you are disparaging and build on it. I don't think either should be lauded as more creative since it's like asking is it more creative to invent the automobile or fine tune it to be an offroad vehicle. How do you even answer that, they're both being creative in different ways.
High magic, low lethality super-heroic fantasy.What's the playstyle?
Depends on what we do with it. We are perhaps all potentially equally creative.Which means we're all equally creative.
Well no, few of us can match the wild madcap... creativity... that you'll find on D&D Beyond Homebrew.Which means we're all equally creative.
Creativity can be constrained by those who hold the purse strings, and all of your examples potentially have that issue, because the artist isn't in full control of what they create.No. I think it is AS creative. No more, no less. Different, certainly. Would you say Taylor Swift is less creative than the unsigned band down the street because she has a record contract and marketing people, and the local band doesn't? Would you say James Gunn is less creative than a Youtuber? Would you say James Patterson is less creative than the writers on fanfiction.net? Of course you wouldn't! And if you did, you'd be lying. Creativity is not a condition of size or connections.
On the other hand Leonardo Da Vinci had a track record of doing whatever he wanted and screwing over the person paying his bills.Creativity can be constrained by those who hold the purse strings, and all of your examples potentially have that issue, because the artist isn't in full control of what they create.
Which is why this is a potential issue, and not a definite one.On the other hand Leonardo Da Vinci had a track record of doing whatever he wanted and screwing over the person paying his bills.
You stated it like it was a given though.Which is why this is a potential issue, and not a definite one.