• 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!

I don't want 5E, I want a definitive D&D (the Monopoly model)

GregoryOatmeal

First Post
This started as another rant about why WOTC should reprint 3.5 but forked into a related train of thought.

I'm edition-fatigued. We all play the same game with about a 1% difference between the editions/spinoffs/clones in what the actual game is. Those small variations on what is essentially the same thing create huge logistical barriers to actually playing the damn game. For example I meet Jim. Jim seems like a cool guy and I'd love to have him play in my 3.5 game but first he needs to go spend $40 on a used 3.5 PHB because he lost his old one and bought a $50 PF corebook that's essentially the same minus some very small tweaks. If Jim is a normal person keeping track of those minor variations in rules would make his head spin, as they're buried amongst two-hundred pages of rules. With 4E and PF this has gotten remarkably bad. Back in the day you just said "2E" or "3E" and people showed up and knew what to do.

Only roleplaying gamers would tolerate so many constant changes in a hobby. Try modifying the rules of Monopoly (Monopoly 2012) or Football (Advanced Football). Make Monopoly players role 3d6 on a pentagon-shaped board or insist football fields be 150 yards - see how people take it. People spend so much time learning a game and they just shut down. This is why in my twenties I have so much trouble playing D&D with my group as a teenager. "Oh, they changed the rules again? I have to buy a new book? What's wrong with my 3.0 book?". As a teenager it was the same getting them to switch from 2E to 3E, and it'll get much worse as work and family eat more time in my thirties and forties. I understand the profit motive to print new books, but what tends to happen is the game just doesn't get played. Older gamers are rare and drop out of the hobby or stick to one edition and give their money to used book stores when their books break or they want additional splat books.

I want to play the same D&D when I'm sixty. In 2045 I want to play it with my sister, uncle, future unborn nephew, and my oldest friend, all of whom haven't played the game in 1d4 decades. That's what D&D is. The differences between 3E/4E/PF are only significant if they keep us from enjoying the game together. I want everyone to have one common PHB and edition so we can all just sit down and play. Like Monopoly I want them to pick it up and play because they know the rules. If you change editions every four to ten years this becomes impossible because everyone's operating on different rules and resources. This is why people don't stick with D&D. This is a big reason D&D is a niche hobby primarily associated with young people with lots of time. And you get old and play Scrabble with your kids and family and old friends.

I'm not saying the game should be a stale board game. At it's essence D&D is a vehicle for creativity and improvisation. That game, a standard-issue roleplaying game, should be on sale for decades like Monopoly. It would still be D&D - where you can make up anything you want and spend $800 on new third party splat books and homerule to hell, it would just have a single solid foundation that everyone knows. People would learn the rules and roleplay together and maybe, by some chance reunion, pick up exactly where they left off thirty years later.

That's what I want. I know, I'm dreaming...
 

log in or register to remove this ad

saskganesh

First Post
I sympathise, but no one is stopping anyone from playing older editions, or retroclones of those older editions, some of which are free online.

I started using a retroclone this year because I knew 90% of the rules already, and I knew it would provide the broadest possible baseline for new and returning players. The experienced players adjust quickly to whatever small changes have been made (like ascending AC) and the new players don't care ... they just want a game they can quickly pick up, get a character generated and then go kill things and take their stuff.

Oh and the planned obsolescence curve is even faster with video & console games. Tabletop RPGS are a model of stability compared to them.
 

GregoryOatmeal

First Post
I love retroclones - C&C is my favorite game. I just visited some friends I grew up with (and used to play 2E/3.0 with) and they took to it instantly after not gaming for a long time. It was great. In my perfect world C&C would be the definitive D&D, but it has a very small market share. But if you can convince folks to play the old-looking indie RPG it's a great game for making a character sheet on notebook paper and doing it like we did in the twentieth century.

But in a way the flood of retro clones makes option bloat worse. To game you have to get five people to agree to eat the same flavor of ice cream, pay $20-40 for access to the flavor (ideally each player should pay) and learn the proper unique customs of eating said ice cream.
 

S'mon

Legend
But in a way the flood of retro clones makes option bloat worse. To game you have to get five people to agree to eat the same flavor of ice cream, pay $20-40 for access to the flavor (ideally each player should pay) and learn the proper unique customs of eating said ice cream.

Well, OSRIC (1e AD&D clone) and Basic Fantasy RPG are available in print from Lulu.com for a lot less than $20 last I saw, plus free in pdf. And having a group learn rules mastery of Basic Fantasy or Labyrinth Lord takes absolutely minimal effort.
 

Grydan

First Post
Only roleplaying gamers would tolerate so many constant changes in a hobby. Try modifying the rules of Monopoly (Monopoly 2012) or Football (Advanced Football). Make Monopoly players role 3d6 on a pentagon-shaped board or insist football fields be 150 yards - see how people take it.

Both football and Monopoly have changed rules over the years. There's literally hundreds of variations of Monopoly on the market. On some, it's only the names of the properties that have changed, but there are versions with alternate rules. There's also plenty of house-ruled games of Monopoly that have been played over the years.

The NFL makes rules changes on a regular basis (as recently as for the new season). NCAA football uses different rules from NFL football. Canadian Football uses a field that's 110 yards long (the centre line is at 55 yards, not 50), 12 players rather than 11, and possessions last for 3 downs rather than 4. Arena Football is also played throughout the US, and has its own variations on the rules. Outside of US and Canada, the name football refers to a different sport entirely (one that's actually played with the feet...).

Your dream is a nice one, but as you yourself acknowledge, it's a dream. There will never be one single edition of D&D that is the right one for everyone. Even if only one edition had ever come out, it wouldn't be a universal experience, as various groups would have their own interpretations of the rules. House rules would abound, and some groups would play with the same house-rules for so long that they'd forget that those weren't the "official" rules, and be baffled that other people didn't play that way.

Not everyone wants the same things from D&D as everyone else. Each of us who have played it and want to continue playing it, rather than some other system, have our own likes and dislikes. Our own favourite editions, favourite rules, favourite feels.

Many of us have settled into that one edition that makes them happy and don't ever need anything else. Those folks aren't going to switch to a universal edition, no matter how widely it is embraced.

Then there are those of us who are happy with where the game is now, but think there's room for improvement by moving forward, rather than back. They'll happily switch to a new edition if it fixes the things they want fixed, but until they hit their perfect dream system, they'll continue to have their eyes on the horizon, waiting for the next wave of changes.

For some people, those changes from edition to edition are even part of the meta-game fun. What sacred cows survive? What's been brought back that we thought was gone forever? What new rule looks like it was written just for you or someone you know? Did the new take on class X finally mesh mechanics with flavour perfectly, or did they fail to hit the mark again?

You've made it clear through this thread and another that your preferred Edition is 3.5. There's literally dozens of books out there supporting it, if not hundreds. There's thousands of players who play it, or some variant of it. If it's the game that makes you happy, then I wish you continued enjoyment of it for many years to come.

But that's not the edition I play. Nor did it ever draw my interest. Most of the players in the groups I currently play in have no interest in it either. If that was the edition that went on in perpetuity, it would go on without me. A hypothetical 5th edition (which I consider an inevitability, though not everyone agrees with me there) might tempt me in if I liked the bulk of the changes made, but a return to 3.5 (or any previous edition, revived as your proposed evergreen D&D) would not.
 
Last edited:

Summer-Knight925

First Post
On that day, I would cry tears of joy.

D&D is a state of mind, and yet people force rules and editions on you and for what?

I don't think D&D should be owned by any 1 company but a name that can be used to describe the type of game.

TOTALLY open gaming license.

Will it happen? Ever?
No.
If there is money to be made with there being editions and ownership, it will never break through and remain as...clustered as it is.
 


Dannager

First Post
Both football and Monopoly have changed rules over the years. There's literally hundreds of variations of Monopoly on the market. On some, it's only the names of the properties that have changed, but there are versions with alternate rules. There's also plenty of house-ruled games of Monopoly that have been played over the years.

The NFL makes rules changes on a regular basis (as recently as for the new season). NCAA football uses different rules from NFL football. Canadian Football uses a field that's 110 yards long (the centre line is at 55 yards, not 50), 12 players rather than 11, and possessions last for 3 downs rather than 4. Arena Football is also played throughout the US, and has it's own variations on the rules. Outside of US and Canada, the name football refers to a different sport entirely (one that's actually played with the feet...).

All of the above deserves to be repeated.

Games change as people reevaluate them. Games can become better. Wishing for a static D&D? That's wishing for the death knell of the hobby.
 

prosfilaes

Adventurer
Only roleplaying gamers would tolerate so many constant changes in a hobby. Try modifying the rules of Monopoly (Monopoly 2012)

Who plays Monopoly seriously? I'm also a board gamer, and in the past two weeks, I've played nine different games, one of which is $85 on Amazon, and several others are $35 a piece new. Top-ranked* games Agricola, Power Grid, Settlers of Catan, and Carcassonne each have a dozen expansions that sometimes can change game play dramatically. Of the top ten highest ranked games, all come from the 21st century, and 6 of them from the last five years.

* On BoardGameGeek.com .

Why is Monopoly so stable? Because it mainly sells to non-gamers who aren't interested in learning something new. Hobbiests, as a general rule, turn up their nose at it, in exchange for newer games.
 

Pentius

First Post
The problem with having Just One D&D is that people don't all want the same edition. You like 3.5, I like 4e. If your Eternal Edition was more like 3.5, I wouldn't play it. I already have a game I enjoy more. If your Eternal Edition was more like 4e, I'd probably play it, but would you? You'd already have a game you enjoy more.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top