D&D 3E/3.5 3e/4e as Operating Systems: An Argument for Grognardism

[Arkhandus]

To summarize the point of this ramble, I think there will be plenty of gamers out there to play 3e forever because they either: 1) love 3e, 2) have too much invested in it to switch or 3) don't care what "OS" they're using, they just want to play Dungeons and Dragons.

All three points reasonably sum up my reasons for sticking with 3(.0)E. I can play D&D indefinitely with the materials I already invested in, and really I just want to play. As long as I can keep things fun and interesting, and have enough options for new characters, I don't need to 'upgrade' and don't see any significant reason to bother. I could play and tinker with 3E well into my greybeard years.

 

[haakon1]

The finances are the same for D&D and software. Whether there's much wrong with an OS or an edition of D&D, the makers have to sell you a new one every few years to stay in business.

Unless they can change the financial model to be ad supported (Google), transaction supported (Amazon), or subscription supported (Salesforce.com).

I'm guessing WOTC is aware of this, being a Seattle company, and is trying to move us slowly to a fully online, subscription based model, in 5e. 4e is the waypoint and testbed to see if people will play online with the Digital Initiative.

I had assumed they would do away with books and go pure subscription for 4e, but I guess it's about baby steps.

(Yes, I'm annoyed the WOTC is run as a business instead of a gamer cooperative, but I think I get their business thinking.)

 

[EyeontheMountain]

Well, I for one hope that 4E is a totally new system, with massive changes to how it works, while keeping the feel of the D&D I have been playing for well over two decades.

I don't want it to be backwards compatible, a term I would not like to see in a role-playing game, as fluff is universal, and really needs no porting form one edition to another.

As for crunch, yes, that is a minor problem to convert, but not much of one. I find no problems winging or slightly adjusting 2E games for 3.5.

So yes, I want 4E to be something totally new. Not an XP-->Vista, but more like a Internet Explorer-->Firefox. Same general function (fantasy game) but far easier to use, user friendly, and more fun overall.

 

[Gentlegamer]

I think your analogy is a pretty good one. I don't even always upgrade my software when prompted, let alone my operating system. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

2E = Windows ME?

I like the original analogy, especially as, in the end, most everyone eventually upgrades. Yes, there are people out there still running Windows 98, but they're few and far between.

 

[EyeontheMountain]

Maybe going a bit off topic, but I see most automatic or eventual upgrading with OSs being the truly old and definitely inferior versions. But I do not think D&D has really turned out an obviously inferior edition yet. I do not like 1E or 2E, but that is not saying they are inferior, they jsut do not let me do fantasy how I like to do it.

But I know for sure that Win95 Win 98 and WinME are all inferior, clearly inferior to XP and probably Vista. Yes people use them, but they are definitely handicapping themselves.

That is not the case with D&D. Still, it is a good analogy, though

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Maybe going a bit off topic, but I see most automatic or eventual upgrading with OSs being the truly old and definitely inferior versions. But I do not think D&D has really turned out an obviously inferior edition yet. I do not like 1E or 2E, but that is not saying they are inferior, they jsut do not let me do fantasy how I like to do it.

But I know for sure that Win95 Win 98 and WinME are all inferior, clearly inferior to XP and probably Vista. Yes people use them, but they are definitely handicapping themselves.

That is not the case with D&D. Still, it is a good analogy, though

Windows hasn't been on a steady path toward better versions for a long time now. The last inarguable upgrade, IMO, was 95 to 98. The next few versions after that were varying degrees of mess, until XP came along. And let's not forget the wonderful sideshow that was Microsoft Bob.

And 3E is definitely an upgrade in many ways over 1E and 2E, in that it streamlined die rolls and brought most everything under a single unified system. It's worth noting that C&C and other "back to 1E" spin-offs didn't do away with the core changes, which I'd say is a pretty clear declaration that 3E is an improvement in multiple key ways.

And 2E ... well, you've got your BD&D clone, your 1E and even OD&D clones. No 2E clones, though, and it's hard to come up with a convincing reason other than "yech" as to why not.

Now, it remains to be seen if 4E is another XP or another Bob, but they're talking the good talk on a number of issues that people here have long expressed concern about. At the very least, they seem aware of most of the problems with 3E. The big question is if they've figured out the solutions.

 

[jdrakeh]

Most people who have a home PC, and use it a lot, whether Windows or Mac, don't automatically upgrade to the latest version of the OS upon release- despite great hype- because they. . .

I still use Win2k Professional at home because it's far more stable that ME and lacks the memory allocation issues of XP (which, as the in-house tech, I've learned to hate here at the office). I am finally being wooed a bit by Vista, though it still has some bugs that need to be worked out before I'd consider a switch (and, realistically, I'd probably need to upgrade my laptop before I made said switch).

3e, like any OS, might not be perfect, but as a power user I know how to manipulate the system to get it to do what I want.

That's a big part of why I plan to stick to 3x for a while. It's familiar. That said, I think it has a lot of bugs. That said, 4e does not seem as though it will have much compatibility with its predecessor (unlike Win2k). Win2k also has a fair amount of forward compatibility (something else that 4e will likely lack). This being the case, 4e will have to address a huge number of the things that I dislike about 3x before picking it up becomes a worthwhile option from the standpoint of practicality.

 

[Celebrim]

From the look of it, 4E represents a more radical change over what has come before than any previous edition. They sound like they set up an abattoir for sacred cows. This will be the least backwards compatible edition ever.

My analogy is this.

3.0 = 1st edition AD&D.
3.5 = 1st edition AD&D post the Unearthed Arcana.
4th = 2nd edition

I know that's harsh, but I suspect the lowest rate of adoption since the transition from 1st to 2nd. The reason is that for the most part, the 3.Xers are happy with the system and only a portion of them are going to think that the direction 4th takes (or supposedly takes) the game is the direction that they wanted to go in. If they wanted a totally new system, they would have already moved on to a totally new system (as many D&D players already had when 3rd came out.) For this reason, I think 3rd is going to produce the same sort of grognards that 1st and OD&D did, who just aren't going to change while the rest of the game goes on its separate way. In fact, there is a risk that the adoption rate of 4th is going to be so low (say 50%), that 3.X will continue to be economicly viable to support for some time. That didn't matter so much for 2nd Ed., but that does matter with the OGL.

Where I think the fanbase for 4th is going to be, and where I think WotC plans to find its fanbase, is online. I think 4th edition is being designed with adoption to a computer format in mind. So your analogy of 4th edition being an OS maybe apt in more ways than one.

 

[elijah snow]

That's a big part of why I plan to stick to 3x for a while. It's familiar. That said, I think it has a lot of bugs. That said, 4e does not seem as though it will have much compatibility with its predecessor (unlike Win2k). Win2k also has a fair amount of forward compatibility (something else that 4e will likely lack). This being the case, 4e will have to address a huge number of the things that I dislike about 3x before picking it up becomes a worthwhile option from the standpoint of practicality.

Is it naive to think that 3e and 4e can co-exist since they appear to be appealing to different kinds of D&D gamers?

Given how much great WotC and 3rd party material is out there to be run (thanks to the open source code of the SRD), it would be nice for 3e to be seen as more of a viable alternative to the "new new thing" and less of an exercise in grognardism.