So the latest Players Handbook for D&D dropped, and I'm starting to see reviews on YouTube and other places. I just wanted to drop a piece of advice on how to manage the critics responses to the new game:
Posting on the comments to reviewers that "they had decided in advance to never like this game" is not helpful. It's not insightful. And it's almost certainly not accurate - but even if it is, D&D does not need you to weigh in to defend it's honor.
No game is for everyone, but D&D is in a unique space in there are SO MANY different play styles for it, and so many different mechanical sets over the years that are not just other edition of D&D but modified editions of D&D with different names. (For example, I'm a 13th Age fan myself for high powered epic heroes with court intrigue, but use Basic/Expert D&D for a sandbox dungeon crawl, high exploration & problem solving game.) That leaves WotC either trying to build a game that does everything poorly (in comparison to other models and retro-clones that hone in on their specific play styles), or leaning into one style at the detriment of others.
Everyone who reads the game brings their own sets of expectations. I know that 5E isn't for me - I tried it in 2014, it didn't click with my preferences, and I set it aside for things that did after stealing some ideas from it - but I can hear reviewers comments and know that they are doing their best from their experience to explain what works and didn't work for them. And that's incredibly helpful. It tells people who share their preferences what works and what didn't.
And maybe the stuff that they wanted doesn't work for you, but it got you to think about what dies work for you. And that's also incredibly helpful.
There isn't a war on. Edition wars are nonsense. Play the game you want. But any of the reviews are going to tell you something about the game, even if that thing is "someone else thinks this could be a problem, I should keep an eye on it even if I don't agree."
No comments:
Post a Comment