4 groups of D&D fans, not 3

[Keefe the Thief]

Finally, another arbitrary way to categorize D&D. As usual, i have to plug my own categories:

- DM's who sucked the D&Dishness directly from the Gygaxian teat.
- Players who won't play in campaigns not including comeliness.
- The "Forgotten Realms Balkan" - Grey Box vs. FR Adventures vs. 2e vs. 3e vs. 4e.
- 2e players who like the generic setting books but not Planescape.
- Planescape fanatics who see other setting material as subservient to their superior meta-setting.
- 3.0 players who never switched because 3.0 Haste is the Real Haste.
- 3.5 players who try to play their characters like 2e characters with kits and who try to DM their games like 1e Greyhawk games pre-Ashes
- 3.5 DMs who try to ignore the existence of settings beyond Eberron (except if you can reinvent it as steam- and/or magicpunk).
- 4e DMs who play without a grid and instant death rules and spheres of annihilation and call their game "advanced 4th edition of first edition".

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I think you're on to something. I don't know if it's a specific grouping of players, by any means, but it resonates with me a bit.

What 3rd Edition was, and what it became are two different things. Pathfinder is a fine revision of what it became.

But at first, 3rd Edition was intended to be played as a streamlined AD&D 2nd Edition. That is the game I played for a very long time, without ever using 3.5 material.

But, eventually system mastery set in, and the nature of the game changed without my ever intending it. I still have fun, but I miss the certain sense of majesty that 3.0 had when it was new.

Majesty. I think that's the word that best describes how I feel about older D&D and what I want out of D&D Next. I wonder if I'm too old, experienced, and jaded to feel that about D&D now.

 

[Steely_Dan]

I call that group "2E"

Yeah, you should stop that; has no one told you?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I'd argue that more new gamers come in from word of mouth, recruitment by current players than a new edition will ever draw in. There's 11 people that I play with. Four of us have been playing since the 70s/80s. The others were all introduced to the game by the four of us. Some were friends or relatives, others we recruited from LFGS', or online. None came into the hobby due to a new release of D&D. If you want new gamers, your game has to appeal to OLD gamers first.

I personally would probably never have started playing D&D if it wasn't for other players dragging me into it. I cannot stress often enough how video-gamey hitpoints are, and how little sense Vancian magic made to me back then.

I was so naive back then...

 

[keterys]

I started playing D&D because of computer games.

I think both 3e and _way_ more so 4e have suffered from a lack of D&D video games of the quality I remember from my childhood. I mean, not knocking D&D Online or Neverwinter. Not at all. Just... Planescape, Goldboxes, etc.

 

[Mattachine]

I started playing D&D because of computer games.

I think both 3e and _way_ more so 4e have suffered from a lack of D&D video games of the quality I remember from my childhood. I mean, not knocking D&D Online or Neverwinter. Not at all. Just... Planescape, Goldboxes, etc.

I know a few people who came into D&D that way, too (video games first).

To elaborate, successful rpg video games sometimes spawn ttrpgs. Dedicated fans want more, and ttrpgs can provide more. Unfortunately, the debacle of Bioware/Atari/Obsidian with Neverwinter Nights and the legal problems with Atari/Turbine/DDO is what stalled D&D video games.

With Cryptic releasing Neverwinter, things could get better . . . but that game seems to be developed using 4th edition as base rules. Now the edition is changing . . . similar to what happened with DDO.

What a mess.

 

[ExploderWizard]

4. Don't have a game that is truly their own at this point. AD&D/retroclones are a bit out of date, 3E doesn't really fit the playstyle and is no longer "what everybody plays", and 4E doesn't really fit at all.

RETRO clones are out of date huh? Who would have thought? I have a theory (which is mine) about the brontosaurus. Would you like to hear it?

 

[Steely_Dan]

I have a theory (which is mine) about the brontosaurus. Would you like to hear it?

Yeah, could be neat.

 

[KidSnide]

The characteristics of the "2e" group could be better expressed, but the OP speaks to my experience. I learned D&D with the BECMI red box, and quickly switched to AD&D. But 2nd Edition came out while I was in middle school so the bulk of my high school, college and convention gaming used 2e.

Personally, I vastly prefer the modern 3.x mechanics over 2e's THACO and other early-RPG-style rules. At the same time, 3.x has far too much system mastery for my tastes and high level combat is way too slow for my preferred style. I like 3.x, but I'd rather play it without magic item creation, magic stat bumps, or character generation abilities from after the core 3 books. (Folks sometimes characterize 3.5 as a different edition from 3.0, but I think 3.5 with the Spell and Magic Item compendiums play more differently from core 3.5 than core 3.5 plays from core 3.0.) So, yeah, I like 3.x, but prefer to play it in a more "AD&D" style and I don't really associate with any particular edition.

But all I really want is a faster version of D&D with modern mechanics and less system mastery. D&DN seems well targeted for these needs.

-KS