Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dire Bare" data-source="post: 6433053" data-attributes="member: 18182">You do realize, that the 5E high-wood-drow split is the EXACT SAME THING as the 4E eladrin-elf-drow split, right? Not in name or in rules, but in concept. And whether we make them, in the rules, three separate races or subraces is a sort of semantics. I agree, there are three major tropes of elves in D&amp;D, which is what they modeled in 4E and again in 5E, but using classic terms rather than re-imagining the high/grey elves.If you felt insulted, I think that says more about you than about the D&amp;D designers. And I'm not trying to be insulting in turn, but this common attitude among gamers has gotten me all riled up over the past few days here on ENWorld.It's totally legit if you don't like some or all aspects of any version of D&amp;D, or if you simply prefer one version of a thing over another. If you (not Jester personally but the more &quot;general&quot; you) felt 4E strayed too far away from canon and were alienated from the new game, that's totally legit and understandable. It's when gamers start complaining about being insulted, talked-down too, or that WotC (in the day) pushed &quot;anti-3E&quot; marketing that still makes me incredulous.At every point on the continuum from the original game through the just released 5th Edition, the designers behind the game were fans first and awesome and nice people. And they, at no point, were forced to do mean things by the &quot;suits&quot; higher up (not that there weren't constraints). At no point did the designers of D&amp;D &quot;insult&quot; fans of previous or current editions, intelligence or otherwise. They simply made creative decisions some fans didn't care for, and those overly sensitive fans saw insult and conspiracy where there was none. But I'm beginning to sound like a broken record, so I'll just run out of steam here . . . . . . *fsssshhh*</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dire Bare, post: 6433053, member: 18182"] You do realize, that the 5E high-wood-drow split is the EXACT SAME THING as the 4E eladrin-elf-drow split, right? Not in name or in rules, but in concept. And whether we make them, in the rules, three separate races or subraces is a sort of semantics. I agree, there are three major tropes of elves in D&D, which is what they modeled in 4E and again in 5E, but using classic terms rather than re-imagining the high/grey elves. If you felt insulted, I think that says more about you than about the D&D designers. And I'm not trying to be insulting in turn, but this common attitude among gamers has gotten me all riled up over the past few days here on ENWorld. It's totally legit if you don't like some or all aspects of any version of D&D, or if you simply prefer one version of a thing over another. If you (not Jester personally but the more "general" you) felt 4E strayed too far away from canon and were alienated from the new game, that's totally legit and understandable. It's when gamers start complaining about being insulted, talked-down too, or that WotC (in the day) pushed "anti-3E" marketing that still makes me incredulous. At every point on the continuum from the original game through the just released 5th Edition, the designers behind the game were fans first and awesome and nice people. And they, at no point, were forced to do mean things by the "suits" higher up (not that there weren't constraints). At no point did the designers of D&D "insult" fans of previous or current editions, intelligence or otherwise. They simply made creative decisions some fans didn't care for, and those overly sensitive fans saw insult and conspiracy where there was none. But I'm beginning to sound like a broken record, so I'll just run out of steam here . . . . . . *fsssshhh* [/QUOTE]

Verification