D&D 5E (2024) Is 5E better because of Crawford and Perkins leaving?

[Zardnaar]

What was the built-in fan base? I’m not a gamer (haven’t even played WoW) and I assumed it was a new game from scratch. I don’t realize it came from another property.

Warcraft 1,2 and 3. Warcraft 3 was kinda massive 2002.
Peak RTS genre 1999-2004 or so as well.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Warcraft 1,2 and 3. Warcraft 3 was kinda massive 2002.
Peak RTS genre 1999-2004 or so as well.

Yep, someone beat you to the punch! Thank you for the reply though!

 

[Zardnaar]

Yep, someone beat you to the punch! Thank you for the reply though!

Point. Warcraft 3 was kinda huge though to add a bit more context.

 

[AlViking]

Ok - I didn’t realize there was a preceding non-mmo game. Thank you!

I played the non-mmo back in the day. My wife and I still make fun of some of the responses the orcs would make when touched like "Grotu", "Zug Zug" and, if you kept clicking on them "Stop poking me!"

I tried the MMO one weekend when it was free but MMOs just aren't my thing.

 

[Zardnaar]

I played the non-mmo back in the day. My wife and I still make fun of some of the responses the orcs would make when touched like "Grotu", "Zug Zug" and, if you kept clicking on them "Stop poking me!"

I tried the MMO one weekend when it was free but MMOs just aren't my thing.

They were great gamed. Much like Halo they mixed a story into the basic idea of blowing stuff up.

 

[ECMO3]

You were never told that.

Yes I was. Again the last line in thew following linked post. You can keep denying, but it is right there if you click on the post, and it is in context.

D&D 5E (2024) Post in thread 'Is 5E better because of Crawford and Perkins leaving?'

Dec 5, 2025

If we are talking RAW laying down and letting someone stab you in the heart will not kill you.

Yes it will, because if they have hit points left, it does not strike the heart or even the body if they have enough hit points. The person rolls over in their sleep and the attack "misses" for the amount of damage the attack does, or some other luck, skill, divine intervention hp damage description. The only time you get struck for huge gory wounds like a stab in the heart is when you drop to 0.

It is disingenous to bring up RAW to defend part of your hypothesis and then ignore RAW...

• Maxperson

You just refuse to admit you were mistaken.

Also I thought you were done replying to me on this topic?

 

[Maxperson]

Yes I was. Again the last line in thew following linked post. You can keep denying, but it is right there if you click on the post, and it is in context.

D&D 5E (2024) Post in thread 'Is 5E better because of Crawford and Perkins leaving?'

Dec 5, 2025

If we are talking RAW laying down and letting someone stab you in the heart will not kill you.

Yes it will, because if they have hit points left, it does not strike the heart or even the body if they have enough hit points. The person rolls over in their sleep and the attack "misses" for the amount of damage the attack does, or some other luck, skill, divine intervention hp damage description. The only time you get struck for huge gory wounds like a stab in the heart is when you drop to 0.

It is disingenous to bring up RAW to defend part of your hypothesis and then ignore RAW...

• Maxperson

You just refuse to admit you were mistaken.

Also I thought you were done replying to me on this topic?

Do you know what context is? Because from your responses to me the answer is no. Hint: It involves...................multiple posts.

 

[TwoSix]

Point. Warcraft 3 was kinda huge though to add a bit more context.

Also relevant that the compounding successes of Warcraft II, Starcraft, and Warcraft III made Blizzard as a studio a very popular, followed property; similar to the reputation Larian enjoys now following Divinity:OS2 and BG3.

 

[ECMO3]

Do you know what context is? Because from your responses to me the answer is no. Hint: It involves...................multiple posts.

Yes I do. In fact it is a reply to something I said where you quoted me, and I what I am claiming is not out of your intended context when you wrote it. If it is out of context, explain what context we are supposed to take it in when you say:

"It is RAW, though, that the hit that brings you to 0 is the one that does the real damage to you."

The context here is D&D 5E rules as written and that considers the board we are on, your wording on the post and other posts on the subject (both yours and mine). If you weren't referring D&D 5E rules as written, then please to tell us exactly what context you were referring to when you wrote this sentence.

So you can clear it up here, or just admit you were wrong or mistaken instead of trying to dodge and pretend you didn't say or mean what you said and meant.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes I do. In fact it is a reply to something I said where you quoted me, and I what I am claiming is not out of your intended context when you wrote it. If it is out of context, explain what context we are supposed to take it in when you say:

"It is RAW, though, that the hit that brings you to 0 is the one that does the real damage to you."

And that right there is taken out of context, both within that very post(since you cut out the context) and taking into consideration the dozens of posts directly to you contradicting your claim there.

You fail miserably at context dude.

(waits for you to ignore context again and demand that I admit to something I never did)