The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Penny Arcade - Comic - Subversion
Dog
Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
Penny Arcade - Comic - Subversion
Videogaming-related online strip by Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins. Includes news and commentary.
+8
Posts
So far most attempts at something being the "last edition" of something have failed. Microsoft tried to make Windows 10 the last one that they would keep patching, but they're on Windows 11 now. But on the flipside, Magic The Gathering has threaded that needle by controlling which card series are tournament-legal, keeping older series somewhat relevant without running afoul of too much power creep. So it certainly can be done.
I think there's a pretty valid way to pull that off using campaigns and scenarios. The danger would be to keep adding new spells and classes, as you run the risk of severe power creep where players feel forced to either use or ban the new classes/spells to keep the core ones from becoming obsolete. But there's always a market for more adventures and adventure paths.
Due to the Satanic Panic in the 80's and even some in the 90's, I was never allowed to play the tabletop games. See Stranger Things season 4 for a historical reference. And anyway, my first tabletop sessions did not happen until college when I bought the 3.5e core rulebooks and some supplemental material as well.
I think there's a bit of tribalism that comes along with when a person first jumps in. In my case, I have a strong affinity for 3.5e because that's when I was able to actually play for real, even though I have video game experience with 2e and 3e. For Gabe (Mike), his affinity is to 4e because that's when he came in. Personally, I hated 4e. It felt like they were trying to literally turn D&D into a video game. But I'm also not going to hold it against anyone who likes 4e, because their experiences are just as valid as mine.
I do, however, think their new naming is silly, and I'm not a fan of breaking from tradition. If 5e is the final edition and from here on out we're only getting micro-revisions and new supplemental material, they should just continue to call it 5e. There's really no need for this rebranding and "One D&D" thing that they're talking about.
4e absolutely had the best combat, and the most fun to build characters (aside from late generation feat bloat and "required" feats). And they finally had a free(ish) online character building tool even though it had some real bad performance problems.
The problem with 4e was the things that made combat great also made it kinda of a pain to play by hand.
And then they squandered the video game license for that generation so we never actually got the DnD4e TRPG we should have.
I think that's a solid starting point for a "final" edition. That said, different people like different rules and mechanics. There will never be an edition that satisfies everyone. WotC would probably benefit from just making new settings and games with their own setup rather than trying to find the model that makes everyone happy.
Well, from a corporate standpoint, sure. But WotC is made up of real people, and plenty of those people really like the game and want people to enjoy it and be happy.
It's the whole "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" thing. Even if they strongly believe in this new model, which I believe they do, it seems like an attempt to modernize just for the sake of it, when the old way is fine.
THAC0: I don't miss it!
ohhh, this is dangerous knowledge...
Not always. I'm old enough to have played 2nd ed D&D and 3rd/3.5 edition will continue to have a special place in my heart for its item creation rules. The later editions didn't have anything near as wonderful.
I think history puts you on the right side of that argument.
It's hard to distinguish the versions (except 4th, which I do not like) because they're all kindof the same taste, a melange, in my memory. I'd have to say what flows the easiest for me is 3.5, probably because the years of practice and theory crafting give it a muscle memory that comes back even after years of disuse. I think it's the art and smell of old paper that unifies them all for me, until I start making a character in a specific system and remember all the things I enjoyed about that particular era and group of friends.
I think that to me, like most people probably, the new is an attack in some way on the precious things I learned how to accept and love. I don't know the new stuff that's here to replace the things I want to protect, I don't know how to like it yet. Sometimes that feeling never gets resolved and I develop strong preferences for systems and processes that aren't really based on the virtues of the things in themselves. The battle lines get drawn and the incentives gets warped. It's hard to see from the inside, especially because some stuff is bad outside of personal bias. I'm ok with feeling hesitant and irritated with the upcoming offerings though, there are pressures in development as things reach exponentially bigger audiences that tend to change a product in ways that alienate the original investors. I guess I'll find out
Like kralizecc, I admit it's mostly a nostalgia thing for me.
(Heck, I got into "Advanced" in the first place because I didn't quite get it wasn't part of the Basic-Expert-etc "D&D" line...)
My question would be, without new editions, how do they intend to sunset their mistakes? Mistakes will be made.
Probably lean even harder on online errata/updates than they do now. Or bans on broken classes/source books like MTG does with cards from sanctioned play.
My skepticism of the permanent live service model has me suspicious that it will low key be abused to drive sourcebook sales.
With races the answer seems to be "keep every option available, but don't reprint the old ones". So technically one person could play a 2014 PHB Dwarf where Stonecunning gives advantage on History checks related to stonework while another player has the Dwarf from the One D&D Character Origins packet where Stonecunning is a limited-use tremorsense ability.