AdmundfortGeographer
Getting lost in fantasy maps
Well, I did say nearly.pawsplay said:
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
How do fans of OTHER RPGs handle new editions?
- Thread starter Remathilis
- Start date
Atlatl Jones
Explorer
It depends on the game, but the reactions are more or less the same. With D&D, they might be more extreme because of the baggage surrounding the 3.5 debacle and years of 4e rumors.
Of the recent edition changes:
Mutants and Masterminds: Very well received, with a few very vocal opponents.
Ars Magica 5th edition: Several aspects of 4th edition were a complete mess, so the new edition was welcomes. There was some controversy about the changes, and at least one former contributor has sworn off the game completely.
Of the recent edition changes:
Mutants and Masterminds: Very well received, with a few very vocal opponents.
Ars Magica 5th edition: Several aspects of 4th edition were a complete mess, so the new edition was welcomes. There was some controversy about the changes, and at least one former contributor has sworn off the game completely.
LoneWolf23
First Post
jdrakeh said:
Yeah, I remember that drama. What helped to overcome it was how open SJGames was about the whole Edition Upgrade once it was announced, and that they actually accepted fan input when came the time to introduced the planned covers. Fans didn't like the proposed covers, but instead of just going back to the drawing board, the company actually accepted other cover proposals, which led to the current image mosaic theme used on all fourth edition covers. I think that helped a lot of fans get over the shock, as fans could now look at it and go "hey... they didn't force this down our throats. They asked our opinion, and worked with it."
ThaneCawdor
First Post
Having played and ran many games with multiple different versions, it mainly depends on the game itself.
Shadowrun:for the most part every new edition has been a great improvement on the last (though I have 4th and have thumbed through it,never played it or read it cover to cover yet so no judgment on that from me). Still I've never had a complaint about their new editions.
Star Wars (d20):there was much moaning and gnashing of teeth when RCR came out, but ultimately most people around here finally adopted it because it was a better product. Of course the reason for that was because the original SWd20 was so bad.
(While I have Saga, I haven't read through it yet,much less actually played with it)
Traveller: An example of what not to do. Between rules & settings the fan base is completely fractured,if someone invites you into a Traveller game with no further info, you can't even plan out a character, much less create one, till you get there. A lot of it is due to the timing of everything, GDW dissolution while still trying to grow T:NE, followed by handing out the IP to pretty much anybody who asked. While it did breath life into a dead game, were the results truly the best that could have come about? Hopefully MGPs "One true book to rule them" will consolidate things back together, though only time can tell.
Traveller is also worth mentioning because it serves as a warning of what one of the worst case scenarios could be: IF D&D 4e flops and the fan base splinters, some playing 4e some playing 3.5, some playing True20, and so on, it will look a lot like the current Traveller community (heck just replace era with setting and you could even have the same arguments).
OWoD (Mage in specific for me): The 1st eds were buggy, the 2nds cleaned many things up such as foci, sphere power levels,though also made some subtle and unwelcome changes to the rules (I LIKED the magic hip flask and the third rail as examples of how coincidental magic worked and disliked seeing that style go). Now Revised was an entirely different beast altogether. A few good rules changes (half of which were common house rules already or even optional rules in the Player guides), coupled with several unnecessary bad rules added (like the new resonance mechanics-useless and actually unrelated to how or what resonance was in previous editions). But what people really disliked were the sweeping background and setting changes.
NWoD vs OWoD: Keep in mind that these are entirely new (and basically unrelated) games. White Wolf wiped the slate clean and started over. And to some extent this is what WOTC is doing. Just keep in mind the difference that most people play Vampire: the Masquerade or
Were Wolf the Forsaken NOT WoD as a game, while on the Wizards side most people play D&D, perhaps set in Eberron or the Realms or Living Greyhawk or even some home brew, but the still view themselves as playing D&D.
Then on the opposite end of things there's Palladium. While they have done 2nd editions of most of their games, the improvements have been minuscule, and in the case of Rifts most of it was left alone specifically to keep most of 40 odd source books valid,leaving the power creeps and troubles intact. And if any game needs a Monte Cook/3.0 style ground up examination and wiping of the board, they surely do. Of course since at heart its nothing more than someones OD&D home rules, would a modern rewrite get you something different than d20?
While I could go on and on about many other systems I've played through multiple editions of (Deadlands, MEGS, Exalted,L5R) these help illustrate the real question: How will the fan base react to 4e? I can't speak for the fan base, but I'll judge it on its own merits. If its truly a better game or the game I want to play (not necessarily the same thing), I'll go ahead and pick it up. Otherwise, as you might have guessed from the preceding paragraphs, I have plenty of other games to choose from.
Shadowrun:for the most part every new edition has been a great improvement on the last (though I have 4th and have thumbed through it,never played it or read it cover to cover yet so no judgment on that from me). Still I've never had a complaint about their new editions.
Star Wars (d20):there was much moaning and gnashing of teeth when RCR came out, but ultimately most people around here finally adopted it because it was a better product. Of course the reason for that was because the original SWd20 was so bad.
(While I have Saga, I haven't read through it yet,much less actually played with it)
Traveller: An example of what not to do. Between rules & settings the fan base is completely fractured,if someone invites you into a Traveller game with no further info, you can't even plan out a character, much less create one, till you get there. A lot of it is due to the timing of everything, GDW dissolution while still trying to grow T:NE, followed by handing out the IP to pretty much anybody who asked. While it did breath life into a dead game, were the results truly the best that could have come about? Hopefully MGPs "One true book to rule them" will consolidate things back together, though only time can tell.
Traveller is also worth mentioning because it serves as a warning of what one of the worst case scenarios could be: IF D&D 4e flops and the fan base splinters, some playing 4e some playing 3.5, some playing True20, and so on, it will look a lot like the current Traveller community (heck just replace era with setting and you could even have the same arguments).
OWoD (Mage in specific for me): The 1st eds were buggy, the 2nds cleaned many things up such as foci, sphere power levels,though also made some subtle and unwelcome changes to the rules (I LIKED the magic hip flask and the third rail as examples of how coincidental magic worked and disliked seeing that style go). Now Revised was an entirely different beast altogether. A few good rules changes (half of which were common house rules already or even optional rules in the Player guides), coupled with several unnecessary bad rules added (like the new resonance mechanics-useless and actually unrelated to how or what resonance was in previous editions). But what people really disliked were the sweeping background and setting changes.
NWoD vs OWoD: Keep in mind that these are entirely new (and basically unrelated) games. White Wolf wiped the slate clean and started over. And to some extent this is what WOTC is doing. Just keep in mind the difference that most people play Vampire: the Masquerade or
Were Wolf the Forsaken NOT WoD as a game, while on the Wizards side most people play D&D, perhaps set in Eberron or the Realms or Living Greyhawk or even some home brew, but the still view themselves as playing D&D.
Then on the opposite end of things there's Palladium. While they have done 2nd editions of most of their games, the improvements have been minuscule, and in the case of Rifts most of it was left alone specifically to keep most of 40 odd source books valid,leaving the power creeps and troubles intact. And if any game needs a Monte Cook/3.0 style ground up examination and wiping of the board, they surely do. Of course since at heart its nothing more than someones OD&D home rules, would a modern rewrite get you something different than d20?
While I could go on and on about many other systems I've played through multiple editions of (Deadlands, MEGS, Exalted,L5R) these help illustrate the real question: How will the fan base react to 4e? I can't speak for the fan base, but I'll judge it on its own merits. If its truly a better game or the game I want to play (not necessarily the same thing), I'll go ahead and pick it up. Otherwise, as you might have guessed from the preceding paragraphs, I have plenty of other games to choose from.
Arashi Ravenblade
First Post
OWOD was way better story wise and mechanics wise to NWOD. Course thats one fan opinion. However, you could use almost all OWOD incarnation with each other. Try using NWOD w/ OWOD.
I think the problem with D&D is that they have more books. More money is sunk into it and more prep time is necessary though I never had that problem. So I guess most of the angry fans would rather see a revision or fixs than makes us throw away all our old books. I know if I cant be backwards compatible then Im not playing 4e, though im willing to keep and eye on it just in case.
I think the problem with D&D is that they have more books. More money is sunk into it and more prep time is necessary though I never had that problem. So I guess most of the angry fans would rather see a revision or fixs than makes us throw away all our old books. I know if I cant be backwards compatible then Im not playing 4e, though im willing to keep and eye on it just in case.
The other games I've been interested in which have come out with new editions have struck me in different ways. I loved the 1981 B/X Moldvay/Cook version of D&D from the start and was never interested in the later Mentzer versions. The artwork, organization and general presentation just didn't attract me so I ignored them.
With WFRP, I had reservations about the new edition, but gave it a look and liked a lot of what I saw. Since the old version had been OOP for some years and hadn't been updated since originally published ca. 1986 I didn't have a problem with a new version, though I still use lots of stuff from v1 that I prefer over the "new take". Overall, though, I ended up liking the new edition better.
With the AD&D/3e relationship, I've always viewed 3e as essentially a new game, rather than a later edition of AD&D. The publication of 3e didn't affect me any more than the publication of any other new FRP game. I eventually found it wasn't to my taste and played other games that I found to be more fun.
With 4e I'm mostly unconcerned. I'm happy with the repertoire of games I play now and I doubt I'll be looking to try anything new in that particular genre for a long time.
With WFRP, I had reservations about the new edition, but gave it a look and liked a lot of what I saw. Since the old version had been OOP for some years and hadn't been updated since originally published ca. 1986 I didn't have a problem with a new version, though I still use lots of stuff from v1 that I prefer over the "new take". Overall, though, I ended up liking the new edition better.
With the AD&D/3e relationship, I've always viewed 3e as essentially a new game, rather than a later edition of AD&D. The publication of 3e didn't affect me any more than the publication of any other new FRP game. I eventually found it wasn't to my taste and played other games that I found to be more fun.
With 4e I'm mostly unconcerned. I'm happy with the repertoire of games I play now and I doubt I'll be looking to try anything new in that particular genre for a long time.
Similar Threads
