Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jhaelen" data-source="post: 7026128" data-attributes="member: 46713">Well, I still disagree with you.It's important to look at the context, especially the point in time when Mearls posted this bit. You didn't provide the date, but it's obviously after 5th edition was announced, perhaps even after 5e had been published.Since you ignored my previous evidence, I'm not inclined to invest the time to dig for one of his quotes from the beginning of 4e. Basically, what he posted was a marketing pitch, no more no less.After 3e, 3e suddenly was the worst edition ever, and 4e was going to come to the rescue.After 4e, 4e suddenly was the worst edition ever, and 5e was going to come to the rescue.If 4e was a significant departure from the 'core of D&amp;D', then 3e was, as well.In retrospective I also suspect that Mearls was never entirely a supporter of 4e; actually it often seemed he hadn't really 'grokked' it.Both 3e and 4e were attempts to incporporate ideas from other, modern RPG systems to breath life into the withered husk of D&amp;D again.5e is the equivalent of shrugging their shoulders, burying everything that happened after 2e, building a monument on top and polishing it to mirror-like sheen.In other words 5e was an attempt to 'make D&amp;D great again' by undoing everything that had been done to improve it and make it fit for the future.It's closing your eyes to everything outside the microcosm of classic D&amp;D and pretending nothing else exists or could affect you in any way.I understand the appeal to D&amp;D grognards, but it's not a development I feel inclined to support or endorse.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jhaelen, post: 7026128, member: 46713"] Well, I still disagree with you. It's important to look at the context, especially the point in time when Mearls posted this bit. You didn't provide the date, but it's obviously after 5th edition was announced, perhaps even after 5e had been published. Since you ignored my previous evidence, I'm not inclined to invest the time to dig for one of his quotes from the beginning of 4e. Basically, what he posted was a marketing pitch, no more no less. After 3e, 3e suddenly was the worst edition ever, and 4e was going to come to the rescue. After 4e, 4e suddenly was the worst edition ever, and 5e was going to come to the rescue. If 4e was a significant departure from the 'core of D&D', then 3e was, as well. In retrospective I also suspect that Mearls was never entirely a supporter of 4e; actually it often seemed he hadn't really 'grokked' it. Both 3e and 4e were attempts to incporporate ideas from other, modern RPG systems to breath life into the withered husk of D&D again. 5e is the equivalent of shrugging their shoulders, burying everything that happened after 2e, building a monument on top and polishing it to mirror-like sheen. In other words 5e was an attempt to 'make D&D great again' by undoing everything that had been done to improve it and make it fit for the future. It's closing your eyes to everything outside the microcosm of classic D&D and pretending nothing else exists or could affect you in any way. I understand the appeal to D&D grognards, but it's not a development I feel inclined to support or endorse. [/QUOTE]

Verification