Options

Penny Arcade - Comic - Subversion

DogDog Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin

Subversion!

Penny Arcade - Comic - Subversion

Videogaming-related online strip by Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins. Includes news and commentary.

Read the full story here

Posts

  • Options
    GrendusGrendus Registered User regular
    It will be interesting to see if this turns out to just be 5.5e or if they actually manage to pull off the "permanent live service" they're claiming.

    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.

  • Options
    LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    I'm old enough to have been alive during 2e, 3e, 4e, and 5e. Most of my experience comes from video games using various iterations of those rulesets (i.e. Baldur's Gate being built on 2e and Neverwinter Nights being built on 3e).

    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 See Stranger Things season 4 for a historical reference.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.

  • Options
    TofystedethTofystedeth Registered User regular
    Lucascraft wrote: »
    I'm old enough to have been alive during 2e, 3e, 4e, and 5e. Most of my experience comes from video games using various iterations of those rulesets (i.e. Baldur's Gate being built on 2e and Neverwinter Nights being built on 3e).

    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.

    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    Currently when I set up a campaign through Beyond I can pick and choose which content is included, provide a link to other players, and give them access to that specific content to create characters. (For a fee)

    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.

  • Options
    RingoRingo He/Him a distinct lack of substanceRegistered User regular
    I mean, WotC is never trying to make customers happy. Just compelled to spend more money

    Sterica wrote: »
    I know my last visit to my grandpa on his deathbed was to find out how the whole Nazi werewolf thing turned out.
    Edcrab's Exigency RPG
  • Options
    dennisdennis aka bingley Registered User regular
    Ringo wrote: »
    I mean, WotC is never trying to make customers happy. Just compelled to spend more money

    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.

  • Options
    LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    Yeah, I saw the quote from Chris Perkins about this "One D&D" thing. Chris is a super swell dude, and he is clearly passionate about the game. He has dedicated most of his professional life to it. So I genuinely buy his enthusiasm. But I also agree with Quid and think that a final solution is maybe not the right approach. Seems like they're trying to force a modernized business model on a business model that has worked for 40+ years and continues to work right now.

    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.

  • Options
    Knuckle DraggerKnuckle Dragger Explosive Ovine Disposal Registered User regular
    THAC0: if you have to ask, you’re too damn young.

    Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.

    - John Stuart Mill
  • Options
    doompookydoompooky Wild (Let's Draw A) Horses Couldn't Drag Me AwayRegistered User regular
    Tattoo aftercare heresy comic

    we7ek91hy97o.png
  • Options
    DjiemDjiem Registered User regular
    THAC0: if you have to ask, you’re too damn young.

    THAC0: I don't miss it!

  • Options
    Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA Registered User regular
  • Options
    Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    There's a new Spelljammer boxed set? and they say they're doing Planescape next?
    ohhh, this is dangerous knowledge...

  • Options
    Man in the MistsMan in the Mists Registered User regular
    Lucascraft wrote: »
    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.

    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.

  • Options
    GrisloGrislo Registered User regular
    Lucascraft wrote: »
    But I also agree with Quid and think that a final solution is maybe not the right approach.

    I think history puts you on the right side of that argument.

    This post was sponsored by Tom Cruise.
  • Options
    kralizecckralizecc Registered User regular
    I played chainmail, and started collecting my own books with advanced and 2nd so they have a special place in my nostalgia vault. My favorites however are an eclectic group formed, I assume, because the little rpg shop I started going to when mowing lawns started working out was a used book store that had every rpg from every era to that point. It was a magical little place called the hobbit hole, got my spelljammer boxed set there, but we also took a bite from every weird rpg that existed.

    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

    In warframe on PC my name is severenn
  • Options
    Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    When Gygax passed, I tried to run a memorial game of 1st Edition with my group. Folks, it was rough. So many refinements from later editions missing, and (already!) so much arcane and IMO unnecessary cruft.
    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...)

  • Options
    PyrianPyrian Registered User regular
    Hmm. The thing is, new editions aren't really there to bring in new rules. They do that, but it's not why they exist. No, new editions exist primarily to sunset old rules. Each edition starts off pretty good, is usually somewhat improved by early expansions, and eventually goes to shit with bad expansions. Then, a new editions clears out the cruft and the cycle repeats.

    My question would be, without new editions, how do they intend to sunset their mistakes? Mistakes will be made.

  • Options
    OverkillengineOverkillengine Registered User regular
    edited August 2022
    Pyrian wrote: »

    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.

    Overkillengine on
  • Options
    Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA Registered User regular
    Pyrian wrote: »
    Hmm. The thing is, new editions aren't really there to bring in new rules. They do that, but it's not why they exist. No, new editions exist primarily to sunset old rules. Each edition starts off pretty good, is usually somewhat improved by early expansions, and eventually goes to shit with bad expansions. Then, a new editions clears out the cruft and the cycle repeats.

    My question would be, without new editions, how do they intend to sunset their mistakes? Mistakes will be made.

    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.

  • Options
    PyrianPyrian Registered User regular
    That seems to be the worst possible solution, lol.

Sign In or Register to comment.