Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Micah Sweet" data-source="post: 9501165" data-attributes="member: 6747251">No doubt, but I can't see that passage as anything but a blatant attack on simulationist play. Not that WotC 5e supported such very well earlier, but as I've said they've become quite outspoken about it in 5.5. IMO Reducing the importance of setting and worldbuilding (which I feel these &quot;rules&quot; accomplish) leaves the game's purpose to be facilitating the PCs crazy adventures and showing off their cool powers, especially when you figure in the multiple warnings in the encounter building section against making things too dangerous for the players, and the general increase in said powers player-side in the PH.That's my conclusion as to WotC's design goals. I don't expect a lot of folks to agree, and I'm sure it will make a lot of money for WotC. It reads to me as more player-centric than it has ever been,&nbsp; but that appears to be what people want.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Micah Sweet, post: 9501165, member: 6747251"] No doubt, but I can't see that passage as anything but a blatant attack on simulationist play. Not that WotC 5e supported such very well earlier, but as I've said they've become quite outspoken about it in 5.5. IMO Reducing the importance of setting and worldbuilding (which I feel these "rules" accomplish) leaves the game's purpose to be facilitating the PCs crazy adventures and showing off their cool powers, especially when you figure in the multiple warnings in the encounter building section against making things too dangerous for the players, and the general increase in said powers player-side in the PH. That's my conclusion as to WotC's design goals. I don't expect a lot of folks to agree, and I'm sure it will make a lot of money for WotC. It reads to me as more player-centric than it has ever been, but that appears to be what people want. [/QUOTE]

Verification