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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 8783075" data-attributes="member: 6801845">When it comes to the ongoing popularity (and in particular the explosion of popularity of 5E) I would say that branding and name recognition are a big part of it.  However, there's no way we'd have tens of millions of new players if the game sucked.  It must be at least adequate.Anyways, one thing that I think helps the game is that you have structured bits and freeform bits for different aspect of the game.  Combat is fairly structured, run by a lot of rules and restrictions.  You can color outside the lines a bit here and there, but for the most part your freedom to act is constrained by the rules of the game.  Outside of combat?  The DM has a lot of leeway, but most games I've ever played the vast majority of time it's been freeform play supported by the occasional roll of the dice or a spell here and there.This aspect of structured and unstructured play give groups a lot of leeway to play the game they want.  Like structured gameplay and want to spend all your time in combat?  Go for it!  Want to spend it all pretending to be a tabaxi that speaks in a Spanish accent that wears fancy boots?  Awesome.  Personally I like to mix it up and bounce between the two.  It's kind of like a Snickers bar with gooey and crunchy all mixed together.I think that's why I push back against people that want more structure for things outside of combat.  I think that switching back and forth exercises different aspects of people's gaming brain.  In combat you're thinking tactically and how to defeat the enemy with the tools you have at your disposal while working with the team.  Outside of combat?  For the most part it's cooperative narrative story telling, you're bringing a fictional character in a magic world to life.So that's part of why I stick with D&D.  It scratches multiple itches.</blockquote>

Verification