Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Campbell" data-source="post: 8941860" data-attributes="member: 16586">I was responding to the notion that I am in any way trying to suggest that 5e itself needs to change to suit my preferences. Not one bit. I am also saying that the tent is not nearly as big as many people would claim it is. Proven by how much I have struggled against it as a GM for many years before finding the sorts of play experiences I was looking for. That it has an overall structure of play and set of play styles that it supports. That it is not a meaningful replacement for games with different structures. It is a phenomenally poor fit for the play structures I used when I ran 4e for instance.The idea that it is somehow a suitable replacement for say Dungeon World or Stonetop which use a fundamentally different set of play loops is beyond the pale. Frankly I cannot believe that when I put forward the idea that games should be valued for the distinct unique value they provide, giving 5e and other trad games their flowers that it instead spawned a discussion of how these games do not meaningfully function differently despite 10+ pages specifically about how their play procedures were not capable of producing satisfying results for people who enjoy the sort of play experience 2e/3e/5e engender. Both of these things cannot be true at once.</blockquote>