D&D 5E Origin New Edition Panel

[Nagol]

Which is a really great reason to move beyond physical books.

If you ever want to see an end to the edition treadmill, this is the only way that happens.

This doesn't end the edition treadmill, it just turns the speed up a notch.

 

[Dannager]

This doesn't end the edition treadmill, it just turns the speed up a notch.

Nonsense.

People dislike the edition treadmill because it forces them to choose between making all of their prior purchases obsolete and being able to make use of new releases.

The living model avoids this dilemma - the game updates automatically, new releases are always compatible with older releases (because the older releases always use the most up-to-date rules), and nothing becomes obsolete.

Granted, this model may end up untenable after a couple of decades as the prospect of retroactively updating content becomes too daunting, but that's a damn sight better than five years.

Not to raise the hackles of the anti-MMORPG crowd, but look at games like EVE Online and World of Warcraft. Both have been around for about a decade now, and neither is showing any signs of being abandoned. Both have received incredible amounts of retroactive attention. EVE has seen multiple huge graphical updates in addition to its content expansions to keep it looking fresh. World of Warcraft went through an entire core continent redesign to bring level 1-60 content in-line with the quality/look of post-60 content. Someone who bought into World of Warcraft in 2005 can be running the same character, with no interruption of continuity, in 2015. Some EVE corps that existed in 2004 still exist today. At no point was anyone's game rendered obsolete.

 

[tuxgeo]

Nonsense.

People dislike the edition treadmill because it forces them to choose between making all of their prior purchases obsolete and being able to make use of new releases.

The living model avoids this dilemma - the game updates automatically, new releases are always compatible with older releases (because the older releases always use the most up-to-date rules), and nothing becomes obsolete. . . .

So WotC will reach into the .PDF file on my laptop and replace it with the newest version, even if I explicitly ask them not to? What if I print out a character sheet?

 

[Dannager]

So WotC will reach into the .PDF file on my laptop and replace it with the newest version, even if I explicitly ask them not to? What if I print out a character sheet?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, here. Do you believe that this is a problem for living services? That no one has ever contended with this issue before, or that everyone who has tried has been unable to solve it?

Also, you're using words like "PDF" and "print" as though they would be expected to apply to the model in question. They probably wouldn't.

 

[an_idol_mind]

Why would everyone else be at 1.1? The system should push updates automatically.

In which case I don't like the idea of re-reading the rules/staying constantly updated on the errata whenever a new change comes out. But I'm probably in the minority on this board that has never kept up on game errata anyway.

Besides, that sure as hell isn't any more complex than the idea of house rules, which we've been dealing with fine for decades now.

But house rules aren't going to go away, no matter how frequent the updates are.

Then why not get on board with the living game idea? The game gets improvements when it needs them - big or small - but never too fast or too large to manage, changes can be broadcast well in advance, and you structure the game line as a service rather than a set of products.

I personally find it more appealing to make changes in big chunks rather than small increments. I'd much rather update a campaign to a new edition all at once rather than tweak character sheets every session because the initiative rules changed yet again.

For the most part, unless the game is totally wrecked in an area, I can live with it as in. I have a mental laundry list of things I'd like to see in a Pathfinder 2nd edition, for example, but I haven't instituted them in my game because I'd rather be able to bring in players who know the current system and not have to explain 20 pages of house rules to them.

Your preferences are obviously different to mine, which is fine, but I just like the idea of keeping the game consistent unless there's an area that is just flat out not working.

To use the upcoming D&D edition as an example, I think it's dumb that the mace is now a pointless weapon. In the hypothetical constantly updating game, I'd embrace a change to that - but I also don't feel like going through a dozen or so minor changes, many of which will probably be things that I don't like or care about, every couple of sessions. It's much easier for me personally to say, "The mace is now going to be a reskinned quarterstaff," and move on from there.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

So WotC will reach into the .PDF file on my laptop and replace it with the newest version, even if I explicitly ask them not to? What if I print out a character sheet?

Or useing the super magic of computers have errata notes that can be click enable one for one or that mew service from the other thread can put house rules into your phb and what so at most a little work on your part....

Imagine if you can this going well then think this theough

 

[Agamon]

Nonsense.

People dislike the edition treadmill because it forces them to choose between making all of their prior purchases obsolete and being able to make use of new releases.

See, and I posit that a new edition doesn't obsolete your older edition books at all. But an update to the current edition does.

 

[an_idol_mind]

Not to raise the hackles of the anti-MMORPG crowd, but look at games like EVE Online and World of Warcraft. Both have been around for about a decade now, and neither is showing any signs of being abandoned. Both have received incredible amounts of retroactive attention. EVE has seen multiple huge graphical updates in addition to its content expansions to keep it looking fresh. World of Warcraft went through an entire core continent redesign to bring level 1-60 content in-line with the quality/look of post-60 content. Someone who bought into World of Warcraft in 2005 can be running the same character, with no interruption of continuity, in 2015. Some EVE corps that existed in 2004 still exist today. At no point was anyone's game rendered obsolete.

This actually brings to mind another benefit I see of the edition model: the fact that I can hop off the treadmill when I'd like.

In your World of Warcraft comparison, if I want to get into the game but don't like a bunch of the changes they made, I'm out of luck. In tabletop gaming, if I don't like the new edition of a game, I can stick with my edition of choice and be able to easily explain the base starting point to incoming players.

It all boils down to a personal preference, and I personally like the current model better. Time may pass me by on this one, but c'est la vie.

 

[Nagol]

Nonsense.

People dislike the edition treadmill because it forces them to choose between making all of their prior purchases obsolete and being able to make use of new releases.

The living model avoids this dilemma - the game updates automatically, new releases are always compatible with older releases (because the older releases always use the most up-to-date rules), and nothing becomes obsolete.

Granted, this model may end up untenable after a couple of decades as the prospect of retroactively updating content becomes too daunting, but that's a damn sight better than five years.

Not to raise the hackles of the anti-MMORPG crowd, but look at games like EVE Online and World of Warcraft. Both have been around for about a decade now, and neither is showing any signs of being abandoned. Both have received incredible amounts of retroactive attention. EVE has seen multiple huge graphical updates in addition to its content expansions to keep it looking fresh. World of Warcraft went through an entire core continent redesign to bring level 1-60 content in-line with the quality/look of post-60 content. Someone who bought into World of Warcraft in 2005 can be running the same character, with no interruption of continuity, in 2015. Some EVE corps that existed in 2004 still exist today. At no point was anyone's game rendered obsolete.

New releases are usually compatible with the current rules; it is true. But, older releases are not necessarily compatible with the current version, each other, or any one person's preferred version.

In effect, you have N revisions of the game where N grows at least linearly with the changes published and in a worst case, more quickly.

 

[fuindordm]

Taken from Chris Tulach's twitter feed

DMG has more optional stuff for combat. Flanking, using characters as weapons, friendly fire, lingering wounds, etc.

Does that mean my half-ogre gets a proficiency bonus in hobbit throwing?