D&D 5E GAMA Trade Show and Game Developer Conference start Monday - announcement Tomorrow?

[ExploderWizard]

I am starting to wonder if they plan on publishing the same adventure with conversion notes for all editions. Perhaps even the same setting books with notes for all editions too.

The page count would be pretty bulky, plus I don't know if there is anyone on staff that is familliar enough with TSR editions to do all of them.

 

[Mistwell]

The page count would be pretty bulky, plus I don't know if there is anyone on staff that is familliar enough with TSR editions to do all of them.

I think the "notes" can come on the website perhaps? Or just the PDF for a particular edition?

 

[ExploderWizard]

I think the "notes" can come on the website perhaps? Or just the PDF for a particular edition?

The question then becomes, do you get the pdf/access to the conversions when you purchase the module or is a subscription required?

 

[Argyle King]

I am starting to wonder if they plan on publishing the same adventure with conversion notes for all editions. Perhaps even the same setting books with notes for all editions too.

Similar to what I said in my previous post...

At first, that seems like a great idea. I like the concept of "story matters." However, for me (and I assume at least some other players of rpgs,) mechanics can also be part of the story. I think that some rpgs are better suited to certain types of stories due to their mechanical choices; with the very different approaches even within the D&D brand, I'd say that even different editions of D&D cater to different styles. There certainly are ways to modify a story so that it fits better into a game, but, in the end, I still believe there are some styles of story which are generally counter-intuitive when placed side-by-side with some mechanical choices.

I'm not suggesting that the approach can't work. It's simply my believe that not all stories/adventures fit equally well into all editions of the game; I think ignoring that is the wrong thing to do. Instead, I think embracing that would allow different elements (editions) of the brand to be highlighted by showcasing their strengths rather than trying to pretend every edition handles the same stories equally well. I suppose what I'm trying to say is this: "ze game" does not always remain "ze same." In many cases the differences may not be noticeable, but I believe there are enough cases in which the differences are noticed that it's relevant to consider mechanics when speaking about story.

I think your suggestion of notes and things of that nature would greatly help, but I also believe there are times when a story may be so at odds with a particular edition's mechanical choices that -even with notes- the results may not be as good as they otherwise would be with a different edition... or even maybe a different rpg.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Any leaked pictures yet?

 

[Agamon]

Beholder on cover= Branding Iron.

FR stories, instead of generic= Branding Iron

Tiamat= Branding Iron

Etc.

They will push IP to the limit in an effort to pound the brand into everyone's brain. Drow. FR. MIND flayers. Beholders. Named Monsters/deities/NPCs will be done to death.This will be status quo for everything 5e in print/pdf.

Understandable, but the old ways of generic materials, and different campaign settings is over.

Was it ever really generic? oD&D was, but since 1e, we've had named monsters. Adventures defaulted to specific settings. Editions starting with default setting assumptions. Look at the Gold Box video games; if they weren't FR or DL, they were called Eye of the Beholder.

Looks to me like things are changing, yet staying the same.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Was it ever really generic? oD&D was, but since 1e, we've had named monsters. Adventures defaulted to specific settings. Editions starting with default setting assumptions. Look at the Gold Box video games; if they weren't FR or DL, they were called Eye of the Beholder.

Looks to me like things are changing, yet staying the same.

OD&D generic?

As the first release of a new type of game I don't see how it can be called generic. It would be like calling MtG a generic CCG in 1993!

 

[Mistwell]

The question then becomes, do you get the pdf/access to the conversions when you purchase the module or is a subscription required?

My hope would be a code included in the shrink-wrapped module you buy, which gives you access to the stats and other notes for all versions of the game.

 

[Agamon]

OD&D generic?

As the first release of a new type of game I don't see how it can be called generic. It would be like calling MtG a generic CCG in 1993!

Yeah, good point. I just mean compared to subsequent editions.

 

[Mistwell]

Similar to what I said in my previous post...

At first, that seems like a great idea. I like the concept of "story matters." However, for me (and I assume at least some other players of rpgs,) mechanics can also be part of the story. I think that some rpgs are better suited to certain types of stories due to their mechanical choices; with the very different approaches even within the D&D brand, I'd say that even different editions of D&D cater to different styles. There certainly are ways to modify a story so that it fits better into a game, but, in the end, I still believe there are some styles of story which are generally counter-intuitive when placed side-by-side with some mechanical choices.

I'm not suggesting that the approach can't work. It's simply my believe that not all stories/adventures fit equally well into all editions of the game; I think ignoring that is the wrong thing to do. Instead, I think embracing that would allow different elements (editions) of the brand to be highlighted by showcasing their strengths rather than trying to pretend every edition handles the same stories equally well. I suppose what I'm trying to say is this: "ze game" does not always remain "ze same." In many cases the differences may not be noticeable, but I believe there are enough cases in which the differences are noticed that it's relevant to consider mechanics when speaking about story.

I think your suggestion of notes and things of that nature would greatly help, but I also believe there are times when a story may be so at odds with a particular edition's mechanical choices that -even with notes- the results may not be as good as they otherwise would be with a different edition... or even maybe a different rpg.

I loved 4e for many years, but I also think it's the only edition that actually strongly influenced the story based on the mechanics. For example, you needed room to maneuver with 4e, and the stress on that room to move simply isn't there with any of the other editions. I think it wouldn't be difficult to publish an adventure that would work just fine with all of O/B/X, 1e, 2e, 3e, and 5e. Indeed, given the conversion notes already published for 1e/2e modules to work with 5e, and the numerous 3e conversions done of 1e/2e modules by others, I think the proof is already out there that it works just fine.