Thomas Shey
Legend
I disagree. I think you need to actually show some sort of causality, we certainly cannot assume it.
I think its sufficiently self evident that we're coming from too different a place to continue this.
I disagree. I think you need to actually show some sort of causality, we certainly cannot assume it.
Fair enough. None of us have enough information to actually conclude the discussion.I think its sufficiently self evident that we're coming from too different a place to continue this.
Fair enough. None of us have enough information to actually conclude the discussion.
I think its sufficiently self evident that we're coming from too different a place to continue this.
I think that this is what I fundamentally loved about 4e. The game and its setting had a well-developed sense of its own dramatic conflict. Its Points of Light and Chaoskampf themes permeated everything from level 1 to 30. It was part of your class. It was part of your race. It was in the monsters. It was in the setting. So many monsters had a place or role in that conflict. It felt like you could pick up a monster and just knew how to use it, not only mechanically (roles and stat blocks) but also conceptually (its place in the setting conflict). Power sources provide a sense of quasi-political identity in that conflict. If you are a Divine class, that says something about your character's likely stance on the Dawn War. Likewise if you play a Primal class. As you say, there was so much mechanical and conceptual teeth to 4e.What drew me back to Dungeons and Dragons with 4e was that it had an evocative setting that grounded players in the center of its conflicts, had this visceral energy, and mechanics with strong themes and helped you feel your character's mentality. That it's mechanics had teeth. That as a GM I did not need to focus on pacing nearly as much.
When I say it (5e) lacked what was great about 4e I mean exactly that. That it lacks the spirit of the game. It's heart. It's tension. While definitely different games Pathfinder Second Edition and Exalted Third Edition are the only games that come close (to its spirit) in my estimation. It definitely has stuff from 4e, just not the right stuff to enable the sort of play I came to expect from 4e.
I look at the sales of DDAL adventures. They are low (though higher than many others on the DMs Guild).I'll try to find some numbers for you, but I don't exactly keep a running bibliography on everything I learn. I simply recall one of the designers saying that AL makes up a fairly small percentage of players, in spite of being exponentially bigger than any past dnd organized play system in total numbers. They were using that to illustrate how much the playerbase has grown, IIRC.
According to the SCA's own census report from 2010, roughly 65% of the respondents first learned about the SCA through a variation of friend, family member, or significant other. Only 4% of the respondents said they first heard of the SCA through a chance encounter with an event or a demo. D&D is probably a bit different in that many people have heard of it just through cultural osmosis, but I would suspect that the vast majority of players are brought into the fold by friends, family members, or significant others rather than coming across an event by happenstance..he best way to get people into the SCA is to have regular practices open to the public at public parks that see a decent amount of family traffic. Hell, the local shire makes sure that shire practice happens where teenagers getting off the bus home from high school can see them, because you're never going to grow a hobby like SCA without getting kids interested in it.
In the case of the SCA, I think it's more that people are having fun, and want their friends to join in. I think that's the case with most RPGs as well though I don't have any data to back that up.People see other people having fun, and want to join.
Are those places so different that you both can't be a part of D&D??