D&D (2024) Heroes of the Borderlands

[Remathilis]

"Why not?" Is never going to be a good enough reason to recycle history and re-use names without historical context for me.

Why did Jimi Hendrix cover a Bob Dylan song rather than write a new song?

Why did Capcom just release a remastered anthology of Marvel vs Capcom games rather than make MVC 5? (And why did they patch bugs out of them rather them straight port them?)

Why did they make Scream 5 instead of a new slasher horror movie?

Why did Paizo release a version of Pathfinder that doesn't have OGL rather than make a brand new RPG without D&D elements?

I'm sure you have better reasons for all that besides "why not?"

 

[Oofta]

"Why not?" Is never going to be a good enough reason to recycle history and re-use names without historical context for me.

Based on that we shouldn't be playing D&D at all. After all, the game we play now only broadly resembles OD&D.

 

[Remathilis]

Recalling a license is erasing it in a way, since it is no longer legally available, effectively permanently. This is what I hate about licensed games. This is why people pirate, and it's hard to blame them.

But the things still exist. My copy of the Saga books are still on my shelf. I can buy them off eBay.

Existence is not based on availability. I can't buy a DeLorean, but the cars still exist! The Mona Lisa isn't for sale but I can go see it.

 

[Oofta]

This conversation is why, in spite of (or perhaps because of) me not having any nostalgia for the old adventurers (like some others here, I made up all my adventures in the 80's through the oughts) I think that reworking them is more interesting to me than brand new adventures (not that I have a problem with those).

You see, brand new adventures nearly always wind up with their own problems, whereas reworking an old adventure, in particular one with a long history, you can concentrate your design efforts to just fixing the bad stuff - keep all the best stuff. Starting from scratch, you can't do that.

So I find the idea of this adventure to be very exciting.

OTOH, Phandelver and Below was a reworking of the Starter Set Adventure, and it failed to make the original better - so I guess we'll have to see.

The potential is there, though!

I agree. For example, some of the most famous songs were covers, remakes of the original. Aretha Franklin wasn't the first one to sing R-E-S-P-E-C-T, but if people recognize the song it's likely what they think of, not Otis Reding. I see nothing wrong with remaking something from 40-odd years ago.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why did Jimi Hendrix cover a Bob Dylan song rather than write a new song?

Why did Capcom just release a remastered anthology of Marvel vs Capcom games rather than make MVC 5? (And why did they patch bugs out of them rather them straight port them?)

Why did they make Scream 5 instead of a new slasher horror movie?

Why did Paizo release a version of Pathfinder that doesn't have OGL rather than make a brand new RPG without D&D elements?

I'm sure you have better reasons for all that besides "why not?"

I'm sure many if those had to do with making more money by trading on a name (not a great reason either), but I'm open to the idea that there was something better at work.

 

[Remathilis]

Based on that we shouldn't be playing D&D at all. After all, the game we play now only broadly resembles OD&D.

"OD&D(1974) is the one true game. All the other editions are just poor imitations of the real thing. ."

- diaglo

 

[Micah Sweet]

But the things still exist. My copy of the Saga books are still on my shelf. I can buy them off eBay.

Existence is not based on availability. I can't buy a DeLorean, but the cars still exist! The Mona Lisa isn't for sale but I can go see it.

Things that could be for sale or otherwise available but aren't are a different story.

 

[Micah Sweet]

"OD&D(1974) is the one true game. All the other editions are just poor imitations of the real thing. ."

- diaglo

Is there a point to your hyperbole? Is there a thing to discuss there?

 

[Remathilis]

Is there a point to your hyperbole? Is there a thing to discuss there?

Only reminiscing about an old Enworld poster.

Guess I should have tagged him. @diaglo

 

[Oofta]

Is there a point to your hyperbole? Is there a thing to discuss there?

If we can't reuse a name because the new version is different, then we shouldn't be playing D&D. The old 20th century modules are not somehow sacrosanct or particularly important historically.

If you're really serious about using these old modules as a learning experience it seems to me the best way is to compare and contrast the old versions with the new.