Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Dungeons and Dragons

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    On the ice blue line of insanity.

    Dungeons and Dragons

    Wow. WotC already announced D&D 5th Edition.

    Years between editions:

    1st to 2nd: 15 years
    2nd to 3rd: 11 years
    3rd to 4th: 8 years
    4th to 5th: 4 years

    Either each version is getting worse, thus requiring a rewrite. Or they are money-grubbing DBs. Or both.
    Clay Dreslough, Sports Mogul Inc.
    cjd at sportsmogul dot com / blog / twitter

    Forum Rules
    Bug reports and roster corrections:

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2009

    Re: Dungeons and Dragons

    No reason to purchase anything past 3.5. To be honest, G.U.R.P.S works better for D+D than D+D, in my opinion.

    Edit: They are money grubbing db's that ruined a great game.
    Yeah, I'm from Pittsburgh. I love both our sports teams.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Exciting Leduc, Alberta!

    Re: Dungeons and Dragons

    I actually prefer 4th edition. All that 3.5 had over 4th is a pile of needless book keeping. Climb, swim, etc. didn't all need to be separate skills, for example. Chop it down and make it Athletics and Acrobatics, covering everything in a way that makes sense (and they did).

    Besides, if you preferred 3.5, you've got Pathfinder.

    5th sounds like the making of a disaster, though. Trying to please everyone usually ends up pleasing nobody at all.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Cleveland, OH

    Re: Dungeons and Dragons

    Actually your numbers are slightly off Clay:
    1st to 2nd: 11 years (1978-1989)

    And that doesn't include the various versions of Basic, but they're not considered in which edition is which.

    Fourth edition is an abomination. The fact that Pathfinder outsells 4th pretty much speaks for itself. The growing strength of retroclones that focus on everything from the LBB (1974 brown/white box) through the various versions of Basic D&D and AD&D 1st just adds to the argument.

    I suspect what WotC is hoping to do is bring everyone back in: Keep enough of 4th to satisfy the....players....who prefer that, while re-adding role playing elements lost from earlier editions, hence the 5th edition.

    To be honest, though I am hopeful I don't see it happening. D&D Basic or AD&D 1st has little in common with D&D 3.5 and almost nothing with D&D 4. It's not only a question of mechanics - in the end that's very minor. It has everything to do with gameplay, tone, and survivability. A character in earlier editions was far more fragile than in D&D 3.5/4. Until D&D 3.0, most combats could be handled 'on the cuff' without mats or other gameboards. From about 1st through 3.5 (not much before and close to zero since) there was a high emphasis on RPing versus tactical encounters.

    WotC needs to pick a niche and stay there. If they want to keep things as they are - fine. They'll lose some players, but those players are currently lost anyway so no further damage is done. If they want to emulate the older games more - fine, but they risk alienating anyone who's joined in the last 4 years.

    Or they could just be money-grubbing gits. Since v 3.5 was dissimilar enough to 3.0 to suggest getting new books, so 3.0 only lasted about 4 years as well, I think this likely.
    Retired Dynasties I'm Proud of
    To Rule in Kansas City Part I and Part II (Kansas City Royals 1969-73, Hall of Fame)
    Cardinal Sins (St. Louis Cardinals 1976-78) and it's sequel:
    Diverting Destiny (Montreal Expos 1994)
    Script for my Requiem (New Orleans Blues (fictional) 1954)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts