Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 8420496" data-attributes="member: 93670">It doesn't need to be &quot;anti-wotc&quot;.&nbsp; By making any attempt at building off &amp; correcting deficiencies in o5e itself levelup &amp; others like anime5e /stargaterpg/etc have begin taking steps to improve o5e wotc themselves have steadfastly refused to even consider thinking about for several years.&nbsp; Sure all of those forks are going to have different themes lore &amp; tropes to fill while doing so, but in the process of making any changes at all they admit that people who are not happy with the one true way published August 19 2014 are not the problem wotc has so far written them off as. I remember the 3.5 -&gt;4e/PF split &amp; being happier with 3.5 than I am with o5e I stuck with 3.5 for a few years longer&nbsp; before eventually being convinced to give PF a chance.&nbsp; This time things are different for myself and a lot of others in a situation that feels like wotc has written us off, wotc's the one who needs to do the convincing. More rollable tables like vgtr is not what 5e needs but with a date 3 years out wotc has a lot of catchup to do just to meet yesterday's bar &amp; they haven't yet shown much reason to have hope for a point 3 years off that might maybe accept that the areas they have been ignoring in o5e are worthy of being understood enough to address.Compatibility with o5e &amp; a revision 3 years out is not such a concern simply because by remaining with a core ruleset stuck in late 2014 I've had to constantly build things left out while trying to force things like economy &amp; magic items into o5e I've never actually felt like o5e was compatible with d&amp;d itself.5.5 needs to make serious efforts to fix that by improving o5e in ways that make it more compatible with d&amp;d rather than one very specific style of game in a specific corner of a specific setting but after ten years wotc themselves won't have an easy time of pitching that to those who chose to return the sentiment three years prior.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tetrasodium, post: 8420496, member: 93670"] It doesn't need to be "anti-wotc". By making [I]any [/I]attempt at building off & correcting deficiencies in o5e itself levelup & others like anime5e /stargaterpg/etc have begin taking steps to improve o5e wotc themselves have steadfastly refused to even consider thinking about for several years. Sure all of those forks are going to have different themes lore & tropes to fill while doing so, but in the process of making any changes at all they admit that people who are not happy with the one true way published August 19 2014 are not the problem wotc has so far written them off as. I remember the 3.5 ->4e/PF split & being happier with 3.5 than I am with o5e I stuck with 3.5 for a few years longer before eventually being convinced to give PF a chance. This time things are different for myself and a lot of others in a situation that feels like wotc has written us off, wotc's the one who needs to do the convincing. More rollable tables like vgtr is not what 5e needs but with a date 3 years out wotc has a lot of catchup to do just to meet yesterday's bar & they haven't yet shown much reason to have hope for a point 3 years off that might maybe accept that the areas they have been ignoring in o5e are worthy of being understood enough to address. Compatibility with o5e & a revision 3 years out is not such a concern simply because by remaining with a core ruleset stuck in late 2014 I've had to constantly build things left out while trying to force things like economy & magic items into o5e I've never actually felt like o5e was compatible with d&d itself.5.5 needs to make serious efforts to fix that by improving o5e in ways that make it more compatible with d&d rather than one very specific style of game in a specific corner of a specific setting but after ten years wotc themselves won't have an easy time of pitching that to those who chose to return the sentiment three years prior. [/QUOTE]

Verification