Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7219761" data-attributes="member: 996">Indeed, while mechanical 'bloat' may not be the worst thing (all that stuff out there in UA and DMsG isn't killing the game), claiming too much shelf-space, contrary to common marketing wisdom, may well be off-putting to the D&amp;D target customers.&nbsp; Maybe it's simplistic correlation, but D&amp;D has had it's worst troubles when it had it's most hectic schedules of publication - though PF stands as a stark counter-example, it's dynamics are different, having a very strong mutual relationship between the publisher &amp; fanbase.&nbsp; &nbsp;It's counter to inclusiveness.&nbsp; The solution to allow both is to keep options broad &amp; re-skinnable and, critically, balanced, and the game flexible and DM-Empowering.&nbsp;&nbsp; 5e has opted more for broad options &amp; DM-Empowerment than re-skinning &amp; balance, and failed in some specific cases, particularly knuckling under to edition-war prejudices, but, on balance, has done a great job of keeping 5e acceptable to long-time/continuing fans and welcoming to returning players from 3.5/PF (albeit, needing some options turned on) as well as those who haven't played since the heyday of the classic game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7219761, member: 996"] Indeed, while mechanical 'bloat' may not be the worst thing (all that stuff out there in UA and DMsG isn't killing the game), claiming too much shelf-space, contrary to common marketing wisdom, may well be off-putting to the D&D target customers. Maybe it's simplistic correlation, but D&D has had it's worst troubles when it had it's most hectic schedules of publication - though PF stands as a stark counter-example, it's dynamics are different, having a very strong mutual relationship between the publisher & fanbase. It's counter to inclusiveness. The solution to allow both is to keep options broad & re-skinnable and, critically, balanced, and the game flexible and DM-Empowering. 5e has opted more for broad options & DM-Empowerment than re-skinning & balance, and failed in some specific cases, particularly knuckling under to edition-war prejudices, but, on balance, has done a great job of keeping 5e acceptable to long-time/continuing fans and welcoming to returning players from 3.5/PF (albeit, needing some options turned on) as well as those who haven't played since the heyday of the classic game. [/QUOTE]

Verification