I think back about 3rd edition and d20. It didn't start with the circle-jerks about character optimization and everything is game mechanics and all that, but bit by bit in some corners of the internet at least that's the game culture that progressively took over until we had things like the Gaming Den and so on.

Now thinking about D&DN and its modularity. You'll be (hopefully) able to take a simpler approach to the game and will be able to ignore all sorts of different rules and modules to play what it is you want... but these rules and modules will exist nonetheless. What's to stop the powergaming CharOp crowd and the "everything is about rules" crowd to take over the discussion of the game once more?

Quote from: Benoist;742384What's to stop the powergaming CharOp crowd and the "everything is about rules" crowd to take over the discussion of the game once more?

It would take getting rid of the Internet.

Had the Internet/online services been as ubiquitous during the heyday of 2E, it would have been just as "bad" as 3E/d20.

You can't.

(Besides 5E/Next being canceled at the last minute, and never being released officially on the market).

A large number of players enjoy player-side accessibility to rules elements.  They like picking feats in 3.x and PF.  They like preplanning what their character will choose for options or spells as they level up.  They like discussing what they think are good options and what they think are bad.

Do I like that kind of approach?  Not really.  If the majority of people talking about the game on the internet do like that approach, should I attempt to stop them from talking about it on the internet?

LOL!

Good luck with that.

Does the online discussion really matter that much, because none of the charop stuff ever made it to my table when I used to run 3.5. After all, those talking online are just a small minority of those who play.

Quote from: Kemper Boyd;742390Does the online discussion really matter that much, because none of the charop stuff ever made it to my table when I used to run 3.5. After all, those talking online are just a small minority of those who play.

The problem is that they come to dominate Organized Play, and publications are soon dominated by Organized Play concerns.  This happened in 3.X and again in 4.0, and it's happening now with Pathfinder.  (It would come to dominate game concerns in Spycraft and other games with Organized Play as a part of gaming business models.)  

It's the exact same phenomenon that happens in MMORPGs; the small minority acquires disproportionate influence due to their system mastery and superior performance in-game, meaning that more players listen to them and follow their lead because players want to win with least effort, and in time this means that what they say goes and becomes the norm in the player community- and that means publishers cater to it in print.

Quote from: Benoist;742384What's to stop the powergaming CharOp crowd and the "everything is about rules" crowd to take over the discussion of the game once more?

Pathfinder updating in response, or 5e not doing well enough to knock Pathfinder off its perch in the first place?

I think Errata certainly feeds optimisation, so I suspect not bothering with any and instead encouraging GM's to fix problems as they see fit would help cut down on it a lot.

What will stop it?
Only the realization that it exists as an issue, and that feeding the short-term will hurt the game long term.

As well as a focus on elements of the game that allow players to play the role as opposed to being a combat-centric wargame with a veneer of roleplayability on top, like the last iteration.

I'm not really keeping up with 5e but here's my educated guess:

1. GMs saying no.

2. Players not being assholes.

The same sorts of folks have chased away my interests in World of Warcraft, Magic the Gathering and Warhammer Fantasy Battles... well, their love of 'optimization' and the companies that chose to cater to their squeaky wheel... because the 'casual' players are not the ones hanging out on internet forums shouting about 'balance' and such.  

Still, once I learned to ignore their blather I've gone back and had a bit of fun with all of those... and our games of Pathfinder aren't annoying me with it either, there is an optimizer at the table but after I gave him 'the stare' he's been keeping his advice to himself.

As always, it will depend on the GM and the group. I don't expect a game to provide for defenses against morons.

Quote from: Imperator;742408As always, it will depend on the GM and the group. I don't expect a game to provide for defenses against morons.

Yup. People are gonna do whatever stupid shit they feel like, especially on the internet. Play with decent people and leave the powergamers to forn their own groups just like always.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;742392The problem is that they come to dominate Organized Play, and publications are soon dominated by Organized Play concerns.

I am probably not the only one who forgot Organized Play is even a thing.

Was "organized play" always dominated by optimizers from very the beginning?