L
lowkey13
Guest
*Deleted by user*
Meh. 5e has done some things just exactly like all the classic eds, others it's continued the trend line over time, and others (like BA) it's gone the exact opposite of anything D&D has every done before.And successfully!
Looks like they learned something.
In a sense 4e lives on. For 4e fans how reusable are elements from the board game for playing regular 4e D&D?
Not having a quantum alternate universe they did do that in to check against, we can't say for sure.Well, they certainly haven't been hurt by not naming a book "PHB 2" and using evocative and interesting names, have they?
Could be nothing but an accident of market timing. Just a come-back that'd've played out the same whether they were selling anything from 5e DM-Empowered BA to Spawn of Fshawn nonsense between the covers. Could be if they did even one tiny little thing different it'd've crashed and burned. Maybe if they'd stayed with a +2 bonus instead of a second d20 for advantage, or given the fighter weapon specialization, or put a red idol on the cover of PH, that PF1 would still be beating them out in ICv2 rankings.In fact, given the growth of new players to the hobby, perhaps we can at least assume they are doing something right? Just maybe?
Good point. If 5e had bundled the player-side material in the various supplements we've seen so far and instead released it in a PH2 that would not have been continuing an old convention. Instead, it's returned to an old convention, in publishing not-too-focused supplements with unintuitive and/or setting-referent names.
Nah, that got dragged into it, somehow.Here's the thing; what you're arguing is that in 5e, WotC should bite the bullet and make an updated PHB (or PHB 2) that includes many of the new changes and updates.
It's not any kind of simple, and need have nothing to do with the relative success the game is currently enjoying.This strategy is not only breathtakingly simple, it's also pretty successful.
Right, and it doesn't mean that it does.Success tends to be the product of many factors. And it's difficult to tease out the importance of any one.
But just because success might have many factors, doesn't mean that one of those factors (relative simplicity to enter back in) doesn't contribute to it.