D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Staffan]

Or just dust off any of the previous editions, and if they truly wanted to milk all the profits possible port them into a DDB that works properly with them.
Talk about low hanging fruit.

They did reprints of 1e and 2e a few years back (not sure if they did 3e as well). I don't know how well they sold, but I'm pretty sure Wizards does, and I'm also pretty sure that if they had sold like hotcakes they'd still be selling them. They're also for sale as PDFs via DM's Guild, for $10 each, with options for POD. A friend of mine got a copy of the Rules Cyclopedia this way (though I don't know if he's used it).

And porting them into DDB or a similar system would likely be out of the question – at least the mechanical parts of it. The text, sure, but there's no way there's enough money in making a 2e character generator – particularly given the myriad variant rules which would make programming one a nightmare.

 

[Scribe]

This is like the epitome of a terrible gatekeeping opinion.

About on par with 'you want a different art style? play a different game.' in a hobby space, from a company, that thrives on providing alternative methods of expression and style.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I remember a while back in a thread I made a post, which I thought was obvious hyperbole, about how to appease the grognards that hate all types of change and updates in the new books, WotC should just reprint the old books with updated mechanics. No new art, no new options, no new lore, no new anything. Just reprint the same books over and over again forever, only changing the mechanics to fit the new edition.

I thought this would demonstrate how ridiculous it is for people to insist that there should be no changes to lore in the 5e setting books for Ravenloft, Spelljammer, Planescape and so on. However, someone responded to the post saying that is exactly what they want WotC to do.

Which is to say, I absolutely do not understand “D&D conservatives” in any way. Their only positions seem to be “change is bad” and “it’s the youth who are wrong.” They refuse to even consider the possibility that change can be a good thing and that anything from the old books should change. Nostalgia is all that matters. Progress is not allowed and any hint at criticism of the older books or their contents is a direct personal attack on them (remember Thaco the Clown?).

 

[Scribe]

Progress is not allowed

Again, change is not progress.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

About on par with 'you want a different art style? play a different game.' in a hobby space, from a company, that thrives on providing alternative methods of expression and style.

It’s been 50 years. Of course the game is going to change. Of course new players are going to have a different playstyle. To deny that and insist that everyone must play the old, correct way is gatekeeping.

 

[Scribe]

It’s been 50 years. Of course the game is going to change. Of course new players are going to have a different playstyle. To deny that and insist that everyone must play the old, correct way is gatekeeping.

Reread the thread. You are defending a rant that is nothing but a targeted expression of annoyance (but pulled into its own thread) over someone's opinion that they would appreciate a release of the rules with different 'older style' art. Like Black and White, Line Art.

Nobody is taking about playstyle here. Its literally 'oh you like older art styles? take a hike, you can play something else.'

 

[Minigiant]

I'm a D&D progressive.

My table has Demon Slayers, Kryptonians, 6 types of vampire, a CON base class and Goku.

Every year I add new crap to my game, I can't remember it all.

 

[kayakingpoodle]

They did reprints of 1e and 2e a few years back (not sure if they did 3e as well). I don't know how well they sold, but I'm pretty sure Wizards does, and I'm also pretty sure that if they had sold like hotcakes they'd still be selling them. They're also for sale as PDFs via DM's Guild, for $10 each, with options for POD. A friend of mine got a copy of the Rules Cyclopedia this way (though I don't know if he's used it).

And porting them into DDB or a similar system would likely be out of the question – at least the mechanical parts of it. The text, sure, but there's no way there's enough money in making a 2e character generator – particularly given the myriad variant rules which would make programming one a nightmare.

DM's Guild has most if not all of the old D&D stuff at good prices, some (Most?) Of it can be had print on demand. I just bout Volo's Guide to Waterdeep in POD, very happy with the price, quality and time to get it in my hand.

But the real money would be getting them on something like DDB if it was done right.

 

[Scribe]

Besides, you all know where this threads going.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Reread the thread. You are defending a rant that is nothing but a targeted expression of annoyance (but pulled into its own thread) over someone's opinion that they would appreciate a release of the rules with different 'older style' art. Like Black and White, Line Art.

Nobody is taking about playstyle here. Its literally 'oh you like older art styles? take a hike, you can play something else.'

I think you should reread the OP, because that is clearly not what it’s talking about.