2E vs 3E: 8 Years Later. A new perspective?

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Mr Gygax quit TSR when he was ousted as director and locked out of his office in 1985, in a surprise move while he was away on a business trip. He did not leave voluntarily, and certainly not because of anything to do with rule changes.

He's right here, a few threads down, ask him.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Going back to the original question...

I really don't miss that much about 2Ed, and find 3.X to be one of my favorite systems of all time.

One thing I do miss, though, is what was being done with Clerics/Priests. I liked the concept of having one base class from which all full-progression divine casters were designed.

I truly wish they had they continued with that design philosophy in 3.X- it would have made it much more flexible at modelling other religious models besided the Cleric and Druid (such as animist faith tradiitons) and could have eliminated the need for several base classes that cropped up over time (Shaman, Favored Soul, etc.).

(FWIW, in 30 years of gaming, I've played a lot of the games out there, too, including some as a playtester.)

 

[billd91]

What would it hurt to keep supporting the older rules systems?

<snip>
Now, if you were to keep on supporting the older rules systems, then that would truly be remarkable and honorable.

But probably economically foolish. Very few game companies are going to have the resources to devote to supporting multiple editions of their game. Even massive software companies like Microsoft can only devote resources to older operating systems and applications for a certain amount of time after it's out of print. Then they move on putting the resources where the income stream is going to be the most important... current editions/versions.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Computer software's a bit different, though.

Stopping the 2e stuff when 3e came out is more like a writer ceasing to sell his last book because he wants his customers to buy his latest one. Why not use all your IP to make money?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

There is a lot to be said for not supplying the market with an alternative to your flagship product, especially if it could be considered a "reasonable substitute."

This is even more true if the reasonable substitute has a similar or substantially similar name. Imagine the confusion for someone new to the hobby who picks up a reprinted 2Ed PHB- ALL SALES FINAL- only to realize that its useless for his buddy's upcoming 4Ed game.

There are also costs involved in production and storage of the previous edition materials, though if you're a PDF publisher, that doesn't really apply to you. Even so, you'd have to store that IP on a computer (de minimis costs) and make sure that its always in a currently usable format (could be expensive).

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

*shrug*

It seems very strange not to sell a product for which there's a clear demand. Some of those 1e products cost hundreds of dollars nowadays and still get snapped up. It's only a matter of time before 2e starts to command the same prices.

The people who buy them, by and large, aren't the 4e target market (and in most cases won't buy 4e). You'd avoid brand confusion by releasing them under a new label (I've suggested "Vintage D&D" here in the past).

Production and storage would be zilch now we have print-on-demand.

To me, WOTC's stance on this is incomprehensible, particularly given they don't seem to be challenging OSRIC.

 

[prosfilaes]

It seems very strange not to sell a product for which there's a clear demand. Some of those 1e products cost hundreds of dollars nowadays and still get snapped up.

Which books in particular cost hundreds of dollars? That's a little higher than my experience, and I suspect that that's the influence of collectors, not players. Still, lots of out-of-print books cost fifty or sixty dollars. Sean Punch, the Steve Jackson Product Manager, once said that they had been burned several times bringing books back into print based on the fact they were very expensive on the secondary market.

In any case, about all the books they could bring back into print, they have, in PDF form. It's possible that the value of that program is just not worth expanding it any. I'm sure that they don't want to hit anything slightly mainstream; they don't want to encourage anyone to play old editions that might be playing new.

 

[Spell]

Could you give some examples here? I'm seeing more similarities than differences in D&D editions on this.

unfortunately i don't have the books with me (as in, they are in italy, i am in uk).
on the other hand, i see that someone else gave a breakdown of the chapters page counts later on.

good.

I'm not remembering it as less focused on combat than 3e, can you point out specifics?

as i said, you had NWPs that were absolutely useles sin combat, and were more "character definying", if you wish. and they weren't dumped in some "knowledge" superskill that basically screams to new players: "oh, yeah, then there are these aspects of role playing too..."

that is one thing that comes to mind. another is the fluff in the books. another is the presence of ecology and habitat entries in monstrous compendium: while not useful in each and every campaign, it still signalled that a monster wasn't just a bunch of characteristics useful only to beat your PCs up... you could actually interact with the thing! :O!

such assumption is left to any singular groups to determine with 3e. which means that new players will have very visible the tactical combat part of the game, and might "iss the point" of their DM trying to force them into situations in which fighting might not work.

this, coupled with the "exact" CR of each encounter per character level, has lead, in my opinion, to:
1. outcries by players about how unfair or uncapable their DM is. (i've seen this, but it might be just my experience?)
2. far more problems for DMs that want to stay true to the philosophy of the game "by the book" (why playing this game, if, in fact, you are still playing 2e, or any other game out there?) while retaining their own take on what an enjoyable game is.
3. prolonged the time that a newbie might take before he realises that there's more to pen and paper role playing than killing the monster and raking up treasure.

It looks like most of these are covered by equivalent 3e skills or feats.

fine, but my point is not that 3e is a wargame. only that the combat rules take the foreground. in other words, my feeling (unfortunately is just a feeling, because i don't have my books with me) is that my issue is not what was left out. it's more with the presentation of the ruleset (which can make all the difference in the world) and in the parts that were added, in the core and in subsequent splatbooks.

2e had a focus on storytelling while 3e has a focus on "back to the 1e dungeon" but these seemed to be play style presentations to me, not mechanics of the games.

again, fair enough. but "back to the 1e dungeon" might not necessarily have meant "let's scrap those parts of the game that are not immediately useful in the (very early) 1e dungeon-type adventure". if that was what they meant, it would be like saying: "ok, let's design a game in which people with weapons and armours get into a 10'x10' room and fight 26 skeletons."

it made sense in 1976, maybe. in 2001 (or 2008)? nope! not to me, at least.


ps: you might be right about alignment. i remembered that they got away with weapons and magical items usable only by a person of such and such alignment, but i didn't recall other and more pressing use of it in 3e. as i said, you might be totally right about it.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Which books in particular cost hundreds of dollars?

Well, for example, ST-1 Up the Garden Path, or the Dragon Magazine pdf compilation. (I have both; I'm planning to sell them when the price reaches an arm, a leg and your first born child. ST-1 is nearly there already!)

That's a little higher than my experience, and I suspect that that's the influence of collectors, not players.

I think that's a false dichotomy; most collectors are players. Albeit sometimes commercial-minded ones.

In any case, about all the books they could bring back into print, they have, in PDF form. It's possible that the value of that program is just not worth expanding it any.

I don't think they'd know, not having sold the books in print...

I'm sure that they don't want to hit anything slightly mainstream; they don't want to encourage anyone to play old editions that might be playing new.

Bingo.

As I've said, this makes as much sense as withdrawing The Hobbit from the bookshelves so as to sell more copies of Lord of the Rings.

 

[Piratecat]

However you think I spread false statements is beyond the Great Abyss, which translates you into calling me a liar, bold words from somebody that doesn't even know me.

Hey, your friendly neighborhood admin here. Welcome to the site! But just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're calling you a liar. It means they think you're wrong. There's a big difference. Please don't take offense and assume the worst when that isn't what's intended.

And in this case, PapersAndPaychecks is right; Gary was forced out of the company after having his office locked. He's here on the site, so you can certainly confirm this if you like.