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

[funkysnunkulator]

Here's one thing to think about as a possible metaphor for the coming 4e revolution:

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:

1) Don't see the need to upgrade
2) Have invested great time, money, and resources in their current PC- including software and peripherals
3) May be adopting a wait and see attitude towards whether the upgrade is worth it in terms of new features and bug problems

My prediction is that 4e will be zealously adopted by many of the "early adopters", you know, people like us who care enough about this to expend mental energy discussing 4e on community message boards and casually allude to the thousands of dollars we've spent on gaming material, *but* I don't think everyone feels this way. My gamers, for example, will likely not be aware nor care about the release of 4e because they are casual gamers. Furthermore, if I say we're running 3e forever, they'll play 3e forever.

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. Furthermore, I have so much invested in "software"- and I mean cool adventures, rule expansions, and add ons, that I haven't fully utilized, that the cost benefit ratio is too high for me to switch to 4e.

So, even assuming 4e really has the cool factor, is affordable (they're already piling on the add on costs with D&D Insider and annual core book upgrades), and that the rules actually work (anyone's guess, especially with such bold changes), I still might not upgrade because of my own investment in 3e.

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.

It's just a pity, IMHO, that they didn't make 4e backwards compatible. Because if I *could* run my 3e software on the 4e OS, I'd make the leap in a heartbeat.

agreed. agreed. agreed. so would we all.

 

[Psion]

No what they mean is that the experience of those levels, how the math all works out properly and the game is generally viewed as clicking properly, is what will be mapped to those levels.

And you don't see "this is going to work totally different than levels as you have seen them before" written all over that? I do.

Converting many a 1e/2e adventure to 3.5, I find it enough of a challenge dealing with the fact that the designers have sort of stretched 1-12 into 1-20. Adapting it to 1-30 is going to be a whole new ball of wax.

 

[EyeontheMountain]

T, too, am a little worried about converting old adventures, but I am sure that once I am familiar with the system( if indeed I buy and learn the system) I can do it. Maybe it will not be perfect, but I am sure if can be done.

 

[Psion]

The unfortunate truth is that backwards compatibility and innovation are opposing each other. When making a new edition of a RPG or a new edition of a software (especially an OS), you have to make trade offs between these two.

True enough. But change does not equal improvement. Even if this is an improvement (which is yet to be seen... to keep the OS comparison going, how many of you relished the move to Windows ME?) In order for a change to be worthwhile, it has to be worth more to me that the support I am losing.

In a related note, have I mentioned that I am righteously PO'd that Vista won't let me install upgrades to my mapping programs on the computer that I bought PRIMARILY as a game prep machine?

 

[Christian]

2E = Windows ME?

OK, were you robbed, or do somehow get to read User Friendly in advance?

 

[Raven Crowking]

I don't see extensive lists of houserules in peoples' 3.x games.

I have over 600 pages. Of course, those pages also include reprints of the SRD still in effect, so that the houserule book is the only book required for the game.

RC

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

In order for a change to be worthwhile, it has to be worth more to me that the support I am losing.

Yes, but this is also a highly subjective matter.

Honestly, if a managed, safe and secure OS like Singularity would come on the market, I would be willing to give up a lot. Surely, I would make a compromise, using Windows XP/Vista parallel for some time, but I would absolutely consider it being worth it.

In case of D&D it's even a lot easier. There is nothing I own in D&D material that I would _really_ miss if I switched to a better RPG. Because we played so many campaigns, so many characters already, that I am accustomed to "losing" them and beginnig anew.

 

[funkysnunkulator]

Yes, but this is also a highly subjective matter.

In case of D&D it's even a lot easier. There is nothing I own in D&D material that I would _really_ miss if I switched to a better RPG. Because we played so many campaigns, so many characters already, that I am accustomed to "losing" them and beginnig anew.

it is possible many gamers aren't necessarily going to miss the v3 system as much as what has been built around it and the OGL. players and dm's enjoy being able to pull any idea from thier hoops and messing with it and posting it. personally, that is what will be missed most. since all the content will come from wizards via online, if we log on, we get ideas from a dozen or so guys and gals. right now, we come here or dicefreaks or wherever and get ideas from a million different sources.

any new operating system is hailed as genius if it does what the older one does cleanly and is backward compatible (at least one generation). a new operating system is hailed as worthless if it does not. reckon the same goes for gaming. if what we do with/to the system now cannot be duplicated cleanly or converted easily, v4 will be reviled.

if nothing else, suppose we all continue playing v3 in our games, but still look at the v4 stuff from time to time. since the system is a bit different, it might cause us to look at a situation in a different light and still we end up with something groovy to contribute to our v3 games. not likely, but it could happen. some really cool stuff in our game came from different games with different mechanics.

not championing v4. could really live without it. updates to PHB and DMG periodically, cleaning up level mechanics... this is all stuff they could have been doing with v3 all along. OGL could have stayed with the originally published v3 material. all the new stuff, strictly the domain of wizards.

best of both worlds.

gamers and companies get to put thier stuff out there and wotc still profits from thier exclusive stuff.

oh well.

 

[Crothian]

Most of the 3.x books I have I should be able to use with ease in 4e or any other game. I find that I get books more on ideas then the rules so my collection of 1e and 2e and regular D&D books has been used a lot in my 3.x games.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

it is possible many gamers aren't necessarily going to miss the v3 system as much as what has been built around it and the OGL. players and dm's enjoy being able to pull any idea from thier hoops and messing with it and posting it. personally, that is what will be missed most. since all the content will come from wizards via online, if we log on, we get ideas from a dozen or so guys and gals. right now, we come here or dicefreaks or wherever and get ideas from a million different sources.

Note that according to WotC sources, the OGL will continue in the 4th edition. Which means that there can also be millions of people (if there are actually so many ) to contribute.
There is some content available online on the WotC sites, but it's still just the WotC content.