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

[Umbran]

Besides, you all know where this threads going.

Mod Note:
At the moment, you seem to be actively trying to drag it there.

How about you stop that, please and thanks.

 

[Micah Sweet]

‘and improved’ is certainly associated with ‘new’, it’s not like anyone intends to make an inferior version of something

It is associated, but it shouldn't be IMO. See @I'm A Banana 's excellent post above.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Not to split hairs, but breaking compatibility with a game's previous edition is a business decision based on making more money.
Many companies have published incremental changes of a game as new editions, changes that did not break compatibility.
But, that is not what the original topic of the thread is.

To be fair, not breaking compatibility (or breaking it a littlebutnottoomuch) is also a business decision based on making more money.

 

[Horwath]

my problem with 2024 is that they didn't change enough.

why bother with making new books if you are going to change maybe 5% of the game?
only new thing is weapon mastery and that is a half miss-half hit feature. It could have been done better.

universal subclass levels could have open options to universal subclasses, but we couldn't have that either.

as for art, well that is subjective and personal, but IMO, new art sucks completely, not that 2014 art was much better(PHB), but both are better than 4E art which is not a really high bar to jump over.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Well sure, you get lots more network efficiency that way - meaning more products, more players, widespread familiarity, etc, even if they aren’t a perfect fit.

At the apparent cost of actually being happy.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm still shocked there are no evil Superman to fight in any official, popular 3PP, or big homebrew version of D&D of its clones.

There's evil Supermen everywhere else.

Maybe they think if they make a supervillain too obvious than they have to admit that the PCs are superheroes.

 

[Micah Sweet]

my problem with 2024 is that they didn't change enough.

why bother with making new books if you are going to change maybe 5% of the game?

I think there are some pretty solid speculations (and even a little evidence) as to why.

 

[Reynard]

I feel it necessary to point out I was ranting in the OP. There is certainly value in discussing the nuances of old versus new and long term customers versus new customers and so on. But that's not what I was doing. I was (and am) annoyed when (usually older -- like me!) Gamers complain incessantly that the new art, arstgetic or style of current D&D isn't like old D&D. Because old D&D is still there, on your shelf. What's more, finding new adventures and settings and rulebooks for old D&D is literally easier that it ever has been.

All I'm saying is: let D&D change, and play the version of the game you prefer.

 

[Umbran]

I mean "conservatism" as in resistance to change. You see it all the time -- people complaining about the new art or aesthetics, literally saying things like "if they used the old art I would be in." It is so mind boggling to me.

To paraphrase Matt Colville - People complain about things they love. A lot. It is kind of normal.

 

[Lanefan]

‘and improved’ is certainly associated with ‘new’,

Decades of marketers tying those two words together has led to that.

it’s not like anyone intends to make an inferior version of something

So why do inferior versions of various big-time products keep reaching the market?

I was in the wireless trade for a long time and many was the day we'd get a new model of phone in and, on checking it out, realize it was a step backward from the model being replaced (usually due to the manufacturer cheaping out on parts and materials).

Windows 8 was inferior to Windows 7, unless you ran it as if it was Win-7 (it came with an emulator after a while).