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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Warpiglet-7" data-source="post: 8721466" data-attributes="member: 7025282">I don’t actually know who the market was for 5e.  A lot seems to be very at odds with my group’s zeitgeist in a lot of ways—-we are in our 40s.Is the assertion that if it was more non traditional like 4e or that it would have been better?   “Special.”We have a lot of people saying that 4e had a lot more “right” and that the stunning success of 5e was an artifact of the old players or inexperienced players not seeing the flaws or seeing it too late or just familiarity.  Familiarity?First, the player base is not old, generally—so not sure what catering to old players really meant for overall sales.  There were a lot of new players learning the game for the first time.  They were not familiar with squat in a lot of cases.Secondly, 4e did not do well.  So why would we believe leaning into that would have done more?  I assume “special” suggests wide appeal.  Leaning more into a poorly received version would have done more?What I absolutely hold as truth is we are all entitled to like what we like and say so boldly!But in terms of logic…I am more convinced than I was when the thread started that 5e is something “special.”We he more I hear people going out of their way to prove otherwise suggest to me…that people are going out of their way to prove otherwise.It’s either that or the “special conditions” of the world—external factors.  But when I really think about it…a lot of those conditions have been in flux over time but the game keeps on going.I am more convinced this has been a special edition. It’s a fluke, the flaws were too well disguised (for the better part of a decade!) and other contributors just seem hard to believe.For me the idea that people simply like it is much more parsimonious and believable.  Now are all these people just fooling themselves?  Just don’t know what they want and don’t know any better?  That’s all too hard for me to believe:A slow release?  A play test?  Critical role?  I do not doubt they help but cannot believe they account for so much of the variance over time.  They have not been constant like the games growth.  They have not all been present since the start.I now say the game is special.  Final answer.</blockquote>

Verification