Let's talk about "plot", "story", and "play to find out."

[Micah Sweet]

Well, you are on a computer messageboard, not reading a mimiographed fanzine you've gotten in the mail...

The only constant is change. Whether it is "better" or not is a matter of opinion, and kind of moot. It happens anyway.

How you feel about something makes a significant difference in how and if you engage with it. It's hardly a moot point.

 

[soviet]

So are we all agreed then, editions shouldn't exclude people who liked the previous edition, so we're insisting Wizards goes back to 4e?

 

[Micah Sweet]

So are we all agreed then, editions shouldn't exclude people who liked the previous edition, so we're insisting Wizards goes back to 4e?

I would instead simply desire that companies cease calling different games they make by the same name. That'd be a good, honest start.

 

[soviet]

I would instead simply desire that companies cease calling different games they make by the same name. That'd be a good, honest start.

So your position is that 3e and 5e aren't proper D&D?

 

[Micah Sweet]

So your position is that 3e and 5e aren't proper D&D?

They're closer to the original as designed than 4e, but all three would have made more creative sense to be called something different. From an IP holder's perspective, of course, all of them are D&D because the IP holder gets to make that decision.

 

[Fenris-77]

They're closer to the original as designed than 4e, but all three would have made more creative sense to be called something different. From an IP holder's perspective, of course, all of them are D&D because the IP holder gets to make that decision.

More creative sense?! The company that sells D&D, and makes their mint selling D&D, should have called it something else because it doesn't fit your schema? Please, let's not descend into farce here.

 

[Micah Sweet]

More creative sense?! The company that sells D&D, and makes their mint selling D&D, should have called it something else because it doesn't fit your schema? Please, let's not descend into farce here.

I say creative sense, and you give me business reasons. I could not care less about what route makes WotC more money. At all.

 

[soviet]

I say creative sense, and you give me business reasons. I could not care less about what route makes WotC more money. At all.

Well, nothing about 5e is creative. It's entirely a warm mush retread of previous design work filtered through a lens of 'you can do anything you want with it because we haven't taken any firm positions'.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well, nothing about 5e is creative. It's entirely a warm mush retread of previous design work filtered through a lens of 'you can do anything you want with it because we haven't taken any firm positions'.

Fair enough. However, it is a good rules base to build on, which is why I enjoy many 3pp riffs on it. I'm glad WotC made it for that reason, but I don't want or need anything from them at this point.

 

[Fenris-77]

I say creative sense, and you give me business reasons. I could not care less about what route makes WotC more money. At all.

Well, the extent that you care isn't really the prime mover here. But yeah, sure, suggest that WotC should have called 4E something other than D&D. It's still silly. Would you feel less excluded if they'd called it Feelings and Miniatures?