10 years was too long.

[JoeGKushner]

i complained about the price of my Original Boxed set.

some things are too much money for the initial layout.

you have to bite the bullet and decide.

that still doesn't mean it is worth the price. even as much of a fanboy as i am when it comes to OD&D. it was too expensive for a game.

and the current editions aren't even as enjoyable. so they definitely aren't worth it.

Well, that's where we disagree. I'm surprised that you feel the original edition was too expensive thought. You've gotten how many years of use out of it? Bleed you damn stone, bleed for me! Does there ever come a time when you say, "Ah, this game has paid for itself."? I mean, maybe I'm too easy, but if I read the whole book and use even a part of it, I find it money well spent and not "too expensive" at all.

I've played a few versions, Basic, AD&D, AD&D 2nd Ed, D&D 3rd Ed, and D&D 3.5 Ed. I'm having the most fun I've had with the system using the latest version. So I differ with your opinion on that as well. I can understand where you're coming from, but it's not the same place I'm at. I enjoy the feats, PrCs, templates, multi-class options and other goods that are built into the system and don't have to be winged. I enjoy givign some power to the players.

 

[diaglo]

Well, that's where we disagree.

i say the same thing about movie prices.

even movies i enjoyed a lot.


movie x in my book should cost the same to see as movie y or z or a or whatever.

so at the time. monopoly or chess or backgammon or parchisi or uncle wiggley or whatever should've cost the same as OD&D.

OD&D was too expensive.

the fact that i got a lot out of it. doesn't change the fact it cost more than it should have.

 

[JoeGKushner]

i say the same thing about movie prices.

even movies i enjoyed a lot.


movie x in my book should cost the same to see as movie y or z or a or whatever.

so at the time. monopoly or chess or backgammon or parchisi or uncle wiggley or whatever should've cost the same as OD&D.

OD&D was too expensive.

the fact that i got a lot out of it. doesn't change the fact it cost more than it should have.

Well, you've completely lost me.

Are you talking about movies on DVD? Because if you're tlaking about theaters...I haven't been to any theater yet that charges more for a particular movie. Heck, I know all sorts of cheap spots in the theater.

As OD&D isn't monopoly or chess, no, it shouldn't have cost the same. Much smaller scale of sale, even back then I believe. Heck, maybe it should've cost less. But apparently it didn't. Then of course you could talk about it costing less than say a crystal or obsidian chess set or a collector's edition of backgammon with premium components made out of the finest brass. At which point OD&D be cheaper.

I guess I'm wondering... do you feel that you've gotten your money's worth out it despite it costing more than YOU feel it should have?

 

[diaglo]

I guess I'm wondering... do you feel that you've gotten your money's worth out it despite it costing more than YOU feel it should have?

no, i never will. but it still my only complaint. and has been from the first time i purchased.

 

[Belen]

Well, that's where we disagree. I'm surprised that you feel the original edition was too expensive thought. You've gotten how many years of use out of it? Bleed you damn stone, bleed for me! Does there ever come a time when you say, "Ah, this game has paid for itself."? I mean, maybe I'm too easy, but if I read the whole book and use even a part of it, I find it money well spent and not "too expensive" at all.

I've played a few versions, Basic, AD&D, AD&D 2nd Ed, D&D 3rd Ed, and D&D 3.5 Ed. I'm having the most fun I've had with the system using the latest version. So I differ with your opinion on that as well. I can understand where you're coming from, but it's not the same place I'm at. I enjoy the feats, PrCs, templates, multi-class options and other goods that are built into the system and don't have to be winged. I enjoy givign some power to the players.

Well, if I had to pick an edition where I had the most fun gaming, then it would have to be 2e. 3e is fine. I enjoy it, but it is not as fun. It is consistent, but not as fun. There is just too much information, too many rules, far too many situational rules and way too many rules to stack onto other rules.

 

[Desdichado]

movie x in my book should cost the same to see as movie y or z or a or whatever.

Are you saying there are theaters where you live that have different prices for different movies? And I'm not talking about matinee prices either.

As an economist, I think stuff should be priced where most of the customers will buy it. By my logic, D&D is priced just about right, for the most part. That said, 3.5 fell under my demand threshold. The changes didn't particularly excite me, and I wasn't ready to spend that much on core books again.

 

[JoeGKushner]

no, i never will. but it still my only complaint. and has been from the first time i purchased.

Well, I guess I'll just have to file this one under "Dialgo's eccentricities." because I know from other posts that you still collect the D&D books and if you feel each one is too expensive, how much more bitter each purchase must be.

 

[soulcat]

I had the most fun with 2e. Why? Cos that character was the most fun to play.

I haven't played 3e or 3.5e yet, I've only DM'd. I've DM'd every version from basic D&D onwards. The rules have had no effect on my enjoyment because I play rules lite, Plot heavy anyway.

For me, the 3.0 to 3.5 switch was annoying. If it wasn't for e-tools, and the converted 3e-3.5e datasets I would have given up and moved back to Rolemaster.

I buy ALL the books Wizards release, cos I want options. When they change the game, they all become obselete. If they change the game every 4 years, that means I have to buy the 3 core rule books, and somewhere in the region of 50-60 other books.

I have no problem with buying the core rule books whenever they are released, but the waiting for the rest, then buying it is annoying.

10 years is not to long. 4 years may or may not be too short. Whatever the time period is though, I think we the consumers should be given a lot of advance notice so when can make the decision to keep buying books or not.

 

[Desdichado]

10 years is not to long. 4 years may or may not be too short. Whatever the time period is though, I think we the consumers should be given a lot of advance notice so when can make the decision to keep buying books or not.

That depends on the degree of combatibility, I think. Although I haven't really transitioned from 3e to 3.5, I still buy 3.5 sourcebooks, because with some extremely minor exceptions, they still work fine with my 3e corebooks, or even my d20 Modern, d20 Call of Cthulhu, d20 Star Wars or d20 Wheel of Time book, for that matter.

 

[frankthedm]

Player's Option would have been AD&D 2.5 if the modern revisionist ideas were around back then.

My group called it that when it came out.