D&D 5E Do you think we'll see revised core books in 2024? (And why I think we will)

[Aldarc]

I am not sure if anyone noticed that all Dungeons and Dragons fantasy worlds are not real.

I am not sure if you noticed, but mods and their warnings about orc racism discussions are.

 

[imagineGod]

I am not sure if you noticed, but mods and their warnings about orc racism discussions

Seriously, that is over reaching. Or you just feel like quoting me for some reason.

I read that sentence you quoted. By all marketing so far, official WoTC D&D 5e remains a fantasy RPG, so certainly fantasy will be the core of D&D5. 1 or even 5 5.

I have backed some Third Party Publishers 5e Kickstarters like Stargate 5e that are a bit SF or Carbon 2185 that is 5e Cyberpunk.

 

[Maxperson]

I promise that I'm not going to mention orcs.

COUGH Too late! COUGH

 

[Mercurius]

But I would like to point out that arguing from "archetype" is fallacious. "Archetype" is unevidenced. "Archetype" is the conceit of one eccentric Swiss gentleman whose entire body of psychological, philosophical and mystical speculation is just that....speculative. And replete with confirmation bias.

The fact that "archetype"' was popularized by Joseph Campbell, the New Age movement and George Lucas does not make it a real thing.

Nor does it make it a false thing, which you imply by using the word "fallacious." Further, just because you don't like Jung doesn't mean that his ideas aren't relevant (or "fallacious"), not to mention his huge influence. It just likely means you fall on the Freud side of the Freud/Jung divide.

Meaning, feel free to say "I don't like Jung," but to say that using his ideas (which aren't only his ideas - Plato also talked about archetypes, as have many other philosophers and psychologists) is fallacious is, well, fallacious.

 

[Umbran]

Seriously, that is over reaching. Or you just feel like quoting me for some reason.

Mod Note:
The guy was actually trying to help you avoid this red text you are getting now.

You cannot seem to let go of this, and are now dragging it around from one thread to another. Enough, already. You're done in this thread, and I strongly caution you from bringing it up again any time in the near future.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Nor does it make it a false thing, which you imply by using the word "fallacious." Further, just because you don't like Jung doesn't mean that his ideas aren't relevant (or "fallacious"), not to mention his huge influence.

I imply nothing. The fallacy is one of logic. You can infer whatever you like.

It just likely means you fall on the Freud side of the Freud/Jung divide.

It is 2021, not 1921.

Meaning, feel free to say "I don't like Jung,"

I have a great deal of affection for Jung and many other speculative mystics.

 

[Morrus]

Wow.

Well, it’s official, folks. We can’t have a thread about possible new editions of D&D because obvious reasons.

Thread closed.