Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 9147934" data-attributes="member: 996">I get what you're saying, but the edition war was driven by people who could have kept on playing 3.5/PF1 or OSR games forever (many of them still are), but somehow couldn't stand living in a world where someone, somewhere, might be playing a too-different current ed of D&D.And, y'know, if 4e ever gets put to the CC or has the restrictive GSL changed to an OGL, maybe 4e fans who still can't stop whingeing over 5e not 'supporting' them, will know how they felt?I'm right there with you.  I resisted my groups budding interest in Storyteller until M:tA sucked me right in. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  The basic dice pool mechanic was inherently borked, especially how botching a high difficulty roll worked out.  The 'systems' were wildly inconsistent.  It often seemed like the whole storyteller system was just kinda a vague poorly-thrown together excuse for the "Meta-Plot."  That the wolfies' own poll found the vast majority of their fans buying the books never played the games....... and I seem to remember one of them saying something to the effect that "bad rules make games good." (Not a wildly original idea, that flaws in the game build GMing skills that allow GMs to run great games, regardless of system)Popularity isn't evidence of quality, but commercial success is comercial success.  No fallacy there.Don't rock the boat is a sound business decision, until it isn't.  And that timing is usually only clearly visible in retrospect.</blockquote>

Verification