Quote Originally Posted by Oracle_Hunter View Post
To extend the metaphor, the reason you care about Picasso in a world with Da Vinci is that Picasso brought something different to the art world: Cubism. Cubism was radically different from Da Vinci's realistic and mechanically precise artwork and revealed a new way to do art to people who appreciate it.

That said, what is "cubist" about 5e? IMHO, nothing we've seen so far is all that different from any pre-4e edition of D&D.

Just something to think on
I was considering using more similar artists precisely to avoid this, as it's an unfortunate side effect of using particularly distinctive ones. As such - it's like asking why we would have any interest in Hieronymus Bosch's work when Matthias Grunewald's exists. Sure, there are some minor differences (Bosch leaned a little bit more towards the terrifying and grotesque), but they are extremely similar. Yet, people generally appreciate having multiple works by multiple artists around, even if they are simpler, as the simple presence of a large body of work within the medium and genre enhances it.

Cases like Picasso, of course, enhance it much more. Similarly, D&D 5e isn't really going to be worth nearly as much to the genre as something genuinely new will be.