Edition wars...a GOOD thing? or if not, an APPROPRIATE thing?

[Raven Crowking]

I don't think it is badwrongfun, wrongbadfun, or wrongfunbad. I just question the utility and effectiveness of having now three different versions of the same modules.

That same reasoning would apply to having three (or more!) different versions of the same game. Perhaps that isn't really what you meant to imply?

I'm not sure what you mean by "4e is what it is - use it for what it is." As I said, I think that some of these adventures (Beyond the Crystal Cave springs readily to mind) might be better in an edition where skills are more fully developed than in 1e.

YMMV.

I keep hearing how the game is, essentially, the same. I've had some practice now with back-engineering 4e modules, so I am guessing that engineering previous edition modules to 4e would not only be doable, but might supply some good material for those running 4e. I don't assume that everyone running 4e has run every BD&D and 1e module out there.

On top of that, we have a thread about how to make WotC modules better. Performing some conversions might help the WotC module authors see why older modules worked, and very specifically teach how to apply those design principles to 4e.

Finally, anything that adds to the common language (so to speak) between various editions is, IMHO, a good thing. If you want to bring folks together, you have to narrow the gap between them, or provide a bridge. Under the circumstances, providing a bridge seems more doable than narrowing the gap.

IMHO, anyway. YMMV.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

It seems a bit of a practice of trying to beat ever more square pegs into round holes.

BTW, this seems to be backwards to me. If the modules are the pegs, they've retained their shape -- it is the holes that have changed.

Change is one of those constants of the Universe. We can sit and lament (for years) how WotC has not staved off Change for us, or we can adapt and move on.

I don't think that anyone is lamenting how WotC has not staved off Change for us; rather I think that some people are resisting a specific form of change that WotC has proactively instituted. Your statement makes it sound as though WotC were passive victims who simply failed to prevent change, and then got blamed for it.

Change is one of the constants of the universe. That doesn't mean that the form of the change is inevitable, or that we should simply throw up our hands in surrender to the "universe" changing a game in a way that some folks find undesireable.

Nor is moving on any better than remaining with a game you like. If you don't like the new game, moving on to it would be foolish at best.


RC

 

[Garthanos]

That same reasoning would apply to having three (or more!) different versions of the same game. Perhaps that isn't really what you meant to imply?

I'm not sure what you mean by "4e is what it is - use it for what it is." As I said, I think that some of these adventures (Beyond the Crystal Cave springs readily to mind) might be better in an edition where skills are more fully developed than in 1e.

YMMV.

I keep hearing how the game is, essentially, the same. I've had some practice now with back-engineering 4e modules, so I am guessing that engineering previous edition modules to 4e would not only be doable, but might supply some good material for those running 4e. I don't assume that everyone running 4e has run every BD&D and 1e module out there.

On top of that, we have a thread about how to make WotC modules better. Performing some conversions might help the WotC module authors see why older modules worked, and very specifically teach how to apply those design principles to 4e.

Finally, anything that adds to the common language (so to speak) between various editions is, IMHO, a good thing. If you want to bring folks together, you have to narrow the gap between them, or provide a bridge. Under the circumstances, providing a bridge seems more doable than narrowing the gap.

IMHO, anyway. YMMV.


RC

I am well entirely in agreement lets see if we can throw you an experience point. Some modules were put together which may have had very little system support and may indeed have elements better supported now

 

[ExploderWizard]

With regard to conversion projects, if someone were interested in writing up 4E conversions of old modules could they be posted in the DL section here? (assuming no original module material was reprinted and statblocks that were straight from WOTC product only referenced that product)

 

[Garthanos]

I am well entirely in agreement lets see if we can throw you an experience point. Some modules were put together which may have had very little system support and may indeed have elements better supported now

Rats no can do... have to spread it around the man says.

 

[Garthanos]

With regard to conversion projects, if someone were interested in writing up 4E conversions of old modules could they be posted in the DL section here? (assuming no original module material was reprinted and statblocks that were straight from WOTC product only referenced that product)

I think it sounds like a good idea myself... though somebody then needs to police the copyrights and verify those assumptions no?

 

[ExploderWizard]

I think it sounds like a good idea myself... though somebody then needs to police the copyrights and verify those assumptions no?

Heh. If someone verifies the legal mumbo-jumbo then I will post a module.

 

[DanFor]

Thoughts?

In my opinion, the editions war has come about due to the alienation of a segment of the gaming community brought about by decisions made by the current owners of the D&D brand.

This alienation made the editions war unavoidable, so in a sense it is "appropriate". On the other hand, the editions war is not a good thing because it divides us.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Some modules were put together which may have had very little system support and may indeed have elements better supported now

Exactly so.

Not only would this help to create a common ground in terms of play from one edition to the next, but it would also help to "legitimatize" 4e in the eyes of some (who feel it is ill-adapted to do what older editions did), I feel sure.

Maybe those pegs and holes aren't so different after all.

At the very least, it is something proactive that can be done to bridge the gap...and thereby, perhaps, heal the rift to some degree.

Heh. If someone verifies the legal mumbo-jumbo then I will post a module.

Is there a WotC fan policy in place, like with last edition, that specifically allowed this?

Anyone know? Is there anyone from WotC we could ask?


RC

 

[Umbran]

That same reasoning would apply to having three (or more!) different versions of the same game. Perhaps that isn't really what you meant to imply?

Given that they are the same brand, not the same game, no, that isn't what I meant to imply.

I keep hearing how the game is, essentially, the same.

On these forums, I'm not hearing that. I'm hearing "it is still D&D", which is not the same statement. You can have two round flat foods in boxes - one has tomato sauce, the other olive oil and garlic - they are both "pizza", but they aren't the same thing.

Or maybe you're some variant of purist, and one of them isn't pizza. I honestly don't care if you think they are both pizza. If someone stops selling the tomato sauced version, there's only so long you should gripe about it, or keep suggesting new marketing activities for the sauce-less version to make tomato-lovers like it.

If you want to hold a private pizza party, that's a separate matter. But don't expect the people who no longer sell sauced pizza to host it for you.

BTW, this seems to be backwards to me. If the modules are the pegs, they've retained their shape -- it is the holes that have changed.

Somehow, I don't think the particulars of what gets inserted into which is really the telling point here.

I don't think that anyone is lamenting how WotC has not staved off Change for us; rather I think that some people are resisting a specific form of change that WotC has proactively instituted.

WotC instituted it over a year and a half ago. The WotC train has left the station. Further discussion about what they could, would, or should do to gain the love of lovers of earlier editions, when they have clearly decided to not court same, is not "resistance".

Nor is moving on any better than remaining with a game you like. If you don't like the new game, moving on to it would be foolish at best.

I meant move on with your life. Stop worrying about what WotC did or will do about the transition - all evidence is that far as WotC is concerned, the transition is finished (as in complete, done, wrapped up, settled and otherwise not a going concern). They've set their business path, and aren't coming back for the folks they left behind.