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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6360287" data-attributes="member: 42582">No. I am asking [MENTION=59082]Mercurius[/MENTION] if that is the metric - because that is basically the only evidence put forward to enable us to "safely say that 5E is a success".This.Mercurius is writing as if, at this time in 4e's rollout, we could already tell that it would be a "failure", despite the fact that it was successfully selling a lot of books, because the Alexandrian wrote a blog attacking it for "dissociated mechanics" and for not being a RPG.My own assertion, made upthread and repeated here, is this: if the opinions of the Alexandrian and other online "pundits" are crucial to the medium-term success of any edition of D&D, then the market is small enough and that the overall goal of growing RPGers has failed. Contrast the LotR movies, which did not depend for their success on the opinions of a handful of Tolkien purists.The player of an Essentials slayer can decide when to spike. The player of a 5e champion can't. I think that's a very significant difference, in design and in play experience.I remember similar things in many AD&D games, only it was watching ungodly things be done by the spell casters. I'm not sure how you think 5e will avoid this.It seems to me that anyone playing a blaster wizard has a lot of optimisation calculations to perform, given that s/he will have to choose which spell in which slot every round. It's like having to make your AD&D-style spell load-out decisions on a round-by-round basis.</blockquote>

Verification