Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6758474" data-attributes="member: 996">It did what it set out to do well.  That meant continuing to improve on some mechanics (heal-from-0 for instance), while rolling back some for the sake of familiarity over functionality (non-AC attacks back to saves), and making others optional (feats).  No matter how they mixed detail-level mechanical bits from various editions, they still ended up with an overall feel that was more like one than others - that one was 2e.  FWIW.Their relative prevelance as concepts or archetypes in genre, and their similar status as introduced-by-a-PH1 'poster children' for their respective editions, sure. Not really.  I think 4e fans were mostly those who were inclined to give new eds a chance in the first place, and are already playing 5e.  I just don't believe we deserve to be punished for that.  5e is meant to be inclusive, WotC shouldn't have to be blackmailed into inclusiveness with threats of boycotting or pie-in-the-sky predictions of improbable new sales. The appearance is bad for both the product line and community, as it perpetuates the divisions of the edition war.  The sooner that's corrected, the better.  Ignoring it won't make it go away.  Denying it doubles-down and creates not only the appearance that 5e is the H4ter Edition, but that there are still h4ters who trying to keep it that way.</blockquote>