Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="see" data-source="post: 8119334" data-attributes="member: 10531">You can shout &quot;It's more complicated!&quot; and &quot;You can't prove it!&quot; and &quot;You need more evidence!&quot; all you like; people always do that when they can't actually provide a remotely plausible counter-theory.&nbsp; Particularly on message boards, which are unsuited to long, detailed analyses.And &quot;having a cultural moment&quot; isn't a theory, it's just a fact-free label for when D&amp;D was successful without even trying to understand why.The 3e &quot;mini-moment&quot;, of course, perfectly reinforces my thesis, rather than giving you any help. Instead of somehow correlating with your badly-defined &quot;accessibility&quot; (any more than the first D&amp;D &quot;cultural moment&quot; did), it correlates with the period of the 3e short bookshelf (exemplified where &quot;supplements&quot; meant 96-pages-for-two-classes works like Sword &amp; Fist and Song &amp; Silence, rather than 2e/3.5e style shelves of Complete Whatevers or 4e style Corebook II &amp; IIIs). The &quot;moment&quot; was then choked to death under piles of official WotC product when new management that hadn't been part of forming the original 3e strategy mistakenly thought the 3pp d20 explosion meant there was, in fact, massive demand for official crunch.And I'm quite clearly not attributing anything to &quot;whether they put out X sourcebooks or X+1&quot;, and I very certainly didn't say anything like &quot;THIS BOOK MAY BE A BOOK TOO FAR!!!!&quot; Rather, I made an entirely explicit statement of exactly what my concerns with TCoE were -- &quot;A new class and a bunch of change-every-existing-class 'optional' features is a lot further beyond the core envelope than 5e's been pushed before.&quot; The second part is the bigger issue, because if a campaign uses those bits from TCoE, it risks requiring a player to go beyond the PHB to play a from-the-PHB character. That's the true &quot;accessibility&quot; issue.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="see, post: 8119334, member: 10531"] You can shout "It's more complicated!" and "You can't prove it!" and "You need more evidence!" all you like; people always do that when they can't actually provide a remotely plausible counter-theory. Particularly on message boards, which are unsuited to long, detailed analyses. And "having a cultural moment" isn't a theory, it's just a fact-free label for when D&D was successful without even trying to understand why. The 3e "mini-moment", of course, perfectly reinforces my thesis, rather than giving you any help. Instead of somehow correlating with your badly-defined "accessibility" (any more than the first D&D "cultural moment" did), it correlates with the period of the 3e short bookshelf (exemplified where "supplements" meant 96-pages-for-two-classes works like [I]Sword & Fist[/I] and [I]Song & Silence[/I], rather than 2e/3.5e style shelves of Complete Whatevers or 4e style Corebook II & IIIs). The "moment" was then choked to death under piles of official WotC product when new management that hadn't been part of forming the original 3e strategy mistakenly thought the 3pp d20 explosion meant there was, in fact, massive demand for official crunch. And I'm quite clearly not attributing anything to "whether they put out X sourcebooks or X+1", and I very certainly didn't say anything like "THIS BOOK MAY BE A BOOK TOO FAR!!!!" Rather, I made an entirely explicit statement of exactly what my concerns with TCoE were -- "A new class and a bunch of change-every-existing-class 'optional' features is a lot further beyond the core envelope than 5e's been pushed before." The second part is the bigger issue, because if a campaign uses those bits from TCoE, it risks requiring a player to go beyond the PHB to play a from-the-PHB character. That's the [I]true[/I] "accessibility" issue. [/QUOTE]

Verification