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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LurkAway" data-source="post: 5776375" data-attributes="member: 6685059">Over and over, I see evidence of polite but irreconcilable differences within the fanbase. From art to warlords, the divisions never heal.Some posts are simply statements of personal preference. Other posts do the courtesy of explaining a preference. And some posts speculate how a modular D&D will actually unify all these fragments -- which I personally thing is the BIG PICTURE theme that we might take into consideration.In <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/new-horizons-upcoming-edition-d-d/316336-5e-danger-fragmentation.html" target="_blank">this thread</a>, I suggest a core ruleset that defines the inviolate fundamentals of 5E. If you don't play by those rules, you're not playing 5E. (It's a bit like reverse psychology, creating unity by drawing a line in the sand just where most people are standing anyway.)So when we're arguing about something and there seems to be a 50:50 split on a contentious issue, how about a simple rule of thumb:If 80% of the D&D community can agree on a rule, it goes into the core. Otherwise it doesn't.That means, for example, that if half of the fanbase loves warlords and the other half hates warlords, then warlords don't go into the core rules. You can try modifying warlords to create a new process or end result that's more palatable, and if that doesn't work, then warlords go into an optional game setting or supplement. I'm confident that 80% of the community can agree on some things, but I'm curious what elements would pass an 80% rule and where/how the supplementary rules would be presented?</blockquote>

Verification