Thread by @DanTalksGames

One of the sentiments many people seem to have in my #ttrpg threads is why not just let people enjoy games and play them the way they want?

The answer is because baselines are important. To show why, take a seat as I recount the story of the KibblesTasty artificer #dnd 🧵

For context, back before the final version was released in ERftLW, the artificer went through multiple UA passes, including a very poorly received wizard subclass attempt. The most prominent ones were the 2017 and 2019 playtest versions.

The 2017 version had a more general scientist bent than the final version, which was more akin to its OG Eberron inspiration. The two subclasses - alchemist and gunsmith - had bespoke options, with the base class being more a chassis than a core set of mechanics.

This was a huge contrast to the 2019 UA, which was basically the beta of what became the final published version and stated the whole 'spellcasting you can reflavour as magitech' shtick it had, and the subclasses being less bespoke than the 2017 version.

Between those releases, a homebrew designer named KibblesTasty made his own take on the artificer to tide people over in the interim. This version gained widespread notoriety on Reddit, and put his name on the map as one of the pre-eminent names in the 3pp space.

And to be fair, KT deserves it. His stuff is legitimately good quality and far better than anything WotC has released in recent years. The only thing that would ever bring me back to running 5e is if KT released a full fledged Pathfinder-esque 3pp revamp handcrafted by himself.

The problem is...his fans. Think of every negative stereotype about PF2e fans being insufferable shills, then double it by virtue of backing a creator who makes content for the winning horse instead of the underdog. That's KT fanbois.

They were an absolute blight in discourse about the official artificer design

See, here's the thing about the KT artificer. It was legitimately a well designed class. It took that modularity the 2017 version had, and used it as a chassis to extrapolate on its core ideas.

It allowed the creation of multiple, highly customisable subclasses with distinct identities and playstyles, while actually staying relatively balanced.

This was all great design.

The thing was, the document was *over 30 pages long.* For ONE class. It's currently 40.

Like let's make it clear; you all know I love PF2e, but I'm VERY aware it's not going to catch the wider bulk of 5e's audience. Most single classes cap out at 10-15, maybe 20 with splat. There's probably a higher word count per page than 5e formatting, but you get my point.

I realised that this was a great work of homebrew, but wouldn't capture the attention span of mainstream DnD players, and not make the cut for an official product, especially after the failed mystic UA that tried something similar with very mixed and contentious feedback.

I tried to explain this in the interim feedback threads before the final version of the artificer came out, and the response I got wasn't just negative, it was VICIOUS. People REALLY didn't want to hear that it was unlikely WotC would adopt something like the KT artificer.

One of the 5e sub's most prominent homebrew advocates accused me of wanting NO customisation because I didn't think the class would be used as a standard for official design, and said I was clearly lying because I had no statistics or data to back up that opinion.

The thing is, I wasn't disparaging the KT artificer itself, just the idea that people wanted the OFFICIAL, WotC made one to emulate it.

Which brought me to an interesting question: why DID they want the official WotC one to emulate it?

I asked them, why does it matter? You already have a homebrew class that does exactly what you want, and is probably better designed than anything WotC would do anyway. So why do you want the final, official artificer to emulate that, instead of just using the KT homebrew?

And the answer really crystallised something for me:

People said they wanted it to be official, because their DMs weren't letting them use it. Some said their DMs thought there's no way a 40 page class could be balanced. Others said their DMs just flat out didn't allow homebrew.

There were a few who said they just felt it was time WotC pushed for more complex design in 5e on principle, but it made me realise something:

People were fighting for the design to be made official, *because people put stock in official products more than outsiders.*

And why wouldn't they?! Mother knows best, after all. You can trust the WotC official seal of approval, while there's an absolute glut of shitty, imbalanced, or thematically garbage homebrew that would ruin games. People remember DnDwiki, after all.

And I actually get it. I played with the guy who asked the DM for his rogue to have a superpowered evil side using a homebrew shadow magic prestige class, and then asked for a homebrew kensei who had a literal nothing personnel kid attack after that first character died.

But what about OFFICIAL content that's poorly imbalanced? Everyone hates hexblade multiclasses. The cleric domains in TCoE were ridiculous. Bladesinger is way too good at both martial and magic combat. We all know this. Why do we allow those?

Well, simply put...they're official. We trust WotC knows what they're doing (even if they don't) and let content they make through on that fact alone.

But even if we don't, the thing is, *everyone knows these facts.* Everyone knows hexblade is bullshit OP. It just is!

They are cultural and mechanical shibboleths we a share. And the thing is, these people who want designs like KT artificer to be made official? They are RIGHT to be fighting over it! Because official edict matters and determines the baseline from which these shibboleths are born!

What they're wrong about is

A. That what they want is the design everyone wants, and
B. That say they're fine with people playing how they want, while trying to make how they want to play official.

Essentially, it's disingenuously wanting discourse, while attempting domination.

It's the equivalent of free speech bros who say everyone has a right to speak, but only because they think what they say is right and want an excuse to say it.

This also explains why so many 5e fans chafe at suggestions to play other games, but argue ad-infinitum over DnD itself

Because they're not interested in just playing games. They're interested in *shaping the dominant culture of the world's most widely played TTRPG, to play exactly how they want. Because that official design sets the baseline from which everything else is derived.*

And as I said, they're not wrong! Why do you think people care so much about how OneDnD turns out? If it's going to be a flop, why not just keep playing 5e?

Because *official edict and design matters.* Because it's going to be the baseline for the next decade of DnD.

So it's not only factually to suggest wider discourse doesn't matter, but it's wrong to suggest people don't lend a voice to them. The voice is what determines the direction of that baseline we'll all use.

What IS wrong is which voices are worth listening and catering to.

I legitimately don't think the people who want that 40 page hyper modular design are the people that make up the bulk of DnD's audience. I think WotC's direction on tightening the rules and making the base 5e game more mechanical is a mistake that will cost them players.

Not because it's my preference, but because I think they're listening to the loud voices of people who are trying to control the zeitgeist and shape the shibboleths themselves.

That's why I personally go for another angle: fracturing the zeitgeist.

No one game can ever appease anyone. That guy I mentioned before? The hombrew shill? They said they think we're in a golden age of TTRPGs because we're all unified by 5e and speaking the same voice, rather than a Tower of Babil trying to talk over one another.

But they're wrong. We're aren't speaking the same language. This is the whole issue with 5e; it's too many people trying to fight over the same game, with their disparate wants.

We're still in the tower. We've just deluded ourselves into thinking we're speaking the same tongue.