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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest 7037866" data-source="post: 9486094">Your ergo is a false conclusion. To say one thing is not the primary cause of something does not imply other things listed ARE the primary cause--which I never stated. I have always attributed multiple factors to the success of 5E, only one of which is design, which I've acknowledged is decent. It is impossible to know just which factor is the primary reason, or even how "primary" such a factor might be. If we could see all the possible factors in a pie chart, there might be a few that are all about the same--contributing to the bulk of its success. Would any of those three be "primary" over the other two if they are so close? Not to me. Your definition of any margin necessary to be considered primary could easily be different from mine. But I care little for aruging somantics, and if it became a point of contention with another poster, all anyone need do is ask and I'll happily clarify to avoid issues. It would be better than them outright assuming they know what I mean if there is doubt.But my thoughts to NOT include "inescapable logic".  Going back to my original response to Oofta:And my response...I wrote it is popular due to branding (which includes the legacy factor) and influences, but also:the onus is gone (or greatly lessened depending on your experiences),...and in later responses I include other factors such as delivery of product being more available, etc.And this is what I mean: I write one thing, which in no way implies something else, but people (for whatever reason) read that implication into it. I cannot help or know why someone would do this. It is not my responsibility for what they think or feel. I am clear in my writing (in general--we all make mistakes) and try to be compeletly direct. If someone has an issue they can ask for clarification--it would be better IMNSHO.I've never said D&D (or 5E in particular) is "bad" design. In fact, in another post I said I am in the group that finds it acceptable. Could it be better (for my personal experience)? Certainly. It could be worse (like 2024 is worse for me) as well.I have no idea what connection you are making to my response about this (restated in its entirety below):Since we have no way of knowing definitively which is the actual truth, is is subject to our opinions. Popularity as a measure of success is subjective and since we cannot ask every single person in the target population, it is and will always remain an unknonw. The best we can do is express our opinions based on what we do know from the limited information gathered and our own experiences.Of course it can! D&D rises when all RPGs rise. Because it has the lion's share of the market, it rises the most. This (to my knowledge--I could be wrong) was never about the popularity and/or success Yeah, not weak. I am (and was) talking about the availability bottleneck that most certainly did exist back in the 80s and even to a lesser degree in the 90s. Prior editions did not enjoy the same degree of success and popularity 5E due to this as a contributing factor. With each release it became less and less of a factor.Now, today?? I agree, hardly an impacting issue if any at all. I am sure someone somewhere might still have troubles with it... or don't doubt the possibility at least.While White Wolf definitely started to see some loving, it really didn't retain players as much as D&D did IME. Some people really loved Vampire, or Shadowrun (both of which I played back then from time to time when I wanted a break from D&D). But even then, D&D had good design and widespread appeal for a number of factors--not primarily for the design--we all know a lot of design issues exist then!Anyway, hopefully I've made myself and my position clear.</blockquote>

Verification