Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 8543056" data-attributes="member: 6795602">Imo. The connotation of calling something people liked a failure is a bit much. While you are arguably technically right about the words - I think there’s a better way to say it.4e simply didn’t reach expectations.&nbsp; I think everyone agrees on that and it’s exactly how you are using ‘failure’ except without any baggage. There were many things including the edition warring at the time, the radical change in mechanics, etc that caused that to happen.&nbsp; I think we all have a little different perspective of ehat caused 4e to fall short of expectations - especially when we rank the importance.But perhaps most importantly - this thread isn’t really about 4e or 5e. The only reason it came up at all was as a justification for 5e’s magic system being popular compared to very different magic systems.&nbsp; IMO.&nbsp; While 5e selling better than 4e just isn’t really important to the discussion by itself, that fact coupled with the voiced complaints about 4e magic system from many d&amp;d fans does lend credence to the view that 5e style magic is liked better than 4e style magic which itself lendscredence to the view that 5e is liked because of its magic system and not despite it. So IMO, Changing it drastically probably wouldn’t be a good idea for wotc. Home brew for a smaller audience is a different story though. Which does seem to be more where this thread has headed and so that’s probably a better thing for all of us to focus on than 4e vs 5e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 8543056, member: 6795602"] Imo. The connotation of calling something people liked a failure is a bit much. While you are arguably technically right about the words - I think there’s a better way to say it. 4e simply didn’t reach expectations. I think everyone agrees on that and it’s exactly how you are using ‘failure’ except without any baggage. There were many things including the edition warring at the time, the radical change in mechanics, etc that caused that to happen. I think we all have a little different perspective of ehat caused 4e to fall short of expectations - especially when we rank the importance. But perhaps most importantly - this thread isn’t really about 4e or 5e. The only reason it came up at all was as a justification for 5e’s magic system being popular compared to very different magic systems. IMO. While 5e selling better than 4e just isn’t really important to the discussion by itself, that fact coupled with the voiced complaints about 4e magic system from many d&d fans does lend credence to the view that 5e style magic is liked better than 4e style magic which itself lendscredence to the view that 5e is liked because of its magic system and not despite it. So IMO, Changing it drastically probably wouldn’t be a good idea for wotc. Home brew for a smaller audience is a different story though. Which does seem to be more where this thread has headed and so that’s probably a better thing for all of us to focus on than 4e vs 5e. [/QUOTE]

Verification