Edition Wars – Does the edition you play really have an impact on the game?

[Neonchameleon]

Apologies if you felt I was ignoring your point, it was far from deliberate. I have played Basic Ad&D 3.0, 3.5, 4ED, Traveler, Castle and Crusaders and 1 game of some kind of super hero game? Mutants something? As well as a huge variety of home brews of the above systems..

OK. So other than Traveller, literally all those games are part of the D&D family tree. (Including Mutants and Masterminds - a d20 game with the d20 logo and feats - one of the parts of the D&D family tree). And even Traveller is a pretty similar game - the design goal was quite literally "I want to do Dungeons & Dragons in space."

You are preaching System Doesn't Matter when literally all the systems you have played are within touching distance of each other. Of course system barely matters between them - they are all almost the same game and none of them really use the system differently.

This is why I'm suggesting you get experience with very different games like Dread (the resolution mechanic being a Jenga tower), Dogs in the Vineyard (raising dice against each other), or Wushu (the more detailed your description the more d6 you roll and there are almost no other rules).

 

[terrya]

And yet the systems most compared and argued about are 3.5 and 4.0? You make a valid point that my statement of system is irrelevant is perhaps a bit generalist but your own statements would suggest to me that you do agree with me, at least half agree, that another version of D&D will not unite gamers and will be of a similar brush to whats come before it? And to constantly argue the merits of say 3.5 VS 4.0 would be rather pointless considering how easily adaptable and incomplete the rule sets are?

Clearly my own limited experience stops me from being able to expand my article to include an opinion on the more niche gaming systems, which certainly do have a place, but I still stand by my belief that what system of rules your using is such a minor influence on a successful game that to argue over which your DM decides to use is rather pointless?

Its this that leads me to believe that the money from gaming systems has already been made. There will always be a window for more niche systems, like dread, but I truly feel that wizzards need to evolve and accept that the way forward is to start making system free material for multiple genres and breath fresh life into the settings and perhaps look into a system free adventure path?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

And yet the systems most compared and argued about are 3.5 and 4.0?

...on a board primarily dedicated to D&D and its close cousins.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

edit: double post

 

[SLOTHmaster]

You are preaching System Doesn't Matter when literally all the systems you have played are within touching distance of each other. Of course system barely matters between them - they are all almost the same game and none of them really use the system differently.

I think what Terrya is trying to say is that within the D&D family system, though it does have an impact, is overshadowed by the group you're playing with and the DM and that as such the edition wars is people getting overworked by minor details. He did title the post "Edition Wars - Does the edition you play really have an impact on the game," not "Cthulutech vs. Pathfinder Beginner Box - Does what game you play make any difference?"

 

[Neonchameleon]

And yet the systems most compared and argued about are 3.5 and 4.0?

Mostly they are the two newest systems, and are at different extremes of the D&D family tree. 3.5 is building-block detail-centric and the most simulationist version of D&D there has ever been. 4e is strongly class and archetype based, and dramatist/gamist. And was released about a year early before the bugs were worked out.

You make a valid point that my statement of system is irrelevant is perhaps a bit generalist but your own statements would suggest to me that you do agree with me, at least half agree, that another version of D&D will not unite gamers and will be of a similar brush to whats come before it?

Clearly my own limited experience stops me from being able to expand my article to include an opinion on the more niche gaming systems, which certainly do have a place, but I still stand by my belief that what system of rules your using is such a minor influence on a successful game that to argue over which your DM decides to use is rather pointless?

Having been bitten by trying to run a more gonzo system than I'm comfortable with in a setting I didn't know as well as the players (Feng Shui) I disagree. And different systems lend themselves to different types of game - especially if you use and work with the system rather than override it.

Its this that leads me to believe that the money from gaming systems has already been made. There will always be a window for more niche systems, like dread, but I truly feel that wizzards need to evolve and accept that the way forward is to start making system free material for multiple genres and breath fresh life into the settings and perhaps look into a system free adventure path?

If I want system free material I won't bother with WotC. And a system free AP is an interesting thing unless you cripple certain effects such as long distance flight or teleportation. Pushing a wizard to its limits makes certain plots irrelevant - and there the system really intrudes. For that matter Kingmaker, at the start of module 4 (so level 9 or so) makes the big threat to PCs 6 trolls. And has an invading army where no one has a will save > +3. A group of magic using PCs is just going to laugh at that in 3.5 or PF. Even party makeup (especially in 3.X) matters.

 

[Lwaxy]

Edition/system matters insofar as I need a starting point of basic rule ideas to work from. Once I have that, I house rule as fit for the groups I GM for. So rules tend to be slightly different from one group to the other.

They are a guideline, not set in stone, and we are usually very flexible about them. But certain things are seen as give, damage values for example. You need to know what you can do as a player.

 

[Corathon]

I agree that arguing about which edition is better is pointless. Its like arguing about which tastes better, steak or lobster. I prefer steak, you may prefer lobster, but neither tastes better objectively.

Therefore the edition that I run is the one best suited to my taste.

 

[Stormonu]

Edition, system, players, Dm, genre, gathering place - they all affect the game in one way or another.

I'm going to do my best to avoid singling out any particular edition, but just about every version I've run has played quite differently than the others. Don't even get me talking about non-D&D games.

 

[Euphractus]

I think the edition one starts with has a large impact on one's thinking what is the right edition.