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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7216549" data-attributes="member: 996">Not helping.Really not helping. A major goal of 5e was to capture the feel of the classic game.  1e, the AD&D of the fad years, being a major example of that feel.  "That's how it /worked/ in 1e" isn't as strong a reason as "that's how it /felt/ in 1st edition," but it's far from irrelevant in an edition trying to re-capture the Golden Age of those years, and appeal to fans of each & every prior edition.  I suppose fans are just un-natural, that way.  Sometime we want familiar or nostalgic or consistent more than we want 'good.'  Or, to put it another way, 'quality improvement' can include qualities that the target audience finds desirable, no matter how 'bad' they might be judged to be, even objectively.  You don't see the tobacco industry making money hand-over-fist with nicotine-free cigarettes.  Not to go all apologist on you, but 5e does pass the buck to the DM to 'fix' the game how he wants.  Discussing how to fix it at our individual tables is the more productive end than trying to pressure WotC to fix D&D.  Pressuring WotC is what got us here. Unverfiable anonymous anecdotes do not all carry the same weight.  To the person who actually experienced them, they have the gravitas of absolute truth. To the person with an agenda/pre-conceived-notion supported by them, they are backed by the full weight of his own confirmation bias - if they contradict instead of support, then they are 'the exception that proves the rule,' or outright lies that prove the desperation of the other side.  Otherwise, they simply carry no weight, at all.Much of the discussion depends on what we consider "high level" in 5E. That in and of itself is a bit subjective, especially considering how much that's varied over past editions. Fortunately,  anecdotes are not all we have, we each have access to a great deal of the content of the game and can readily verify the facts of it, when making or understanding (or picking appart) an analysis of them. The question is about the game so the impetus to limit consideration to the game, itself, is understandable.  It's also misguided, because, 'out the box,' it's honestly presented as a starting point, and openly calls for the DM to step up and make it work.So, in a sense, and trivially so, it's true that it's not a viable game, at any level.  Rather, the question becomes is it that much harder to make it work at high level.Yes, it is, but folks do it, anyway.</blockquote>

Verification