OD&D 4E and its effect on 1E/OD&D

[maddman75]

What? What? No Unisystem plug? You're slipping, Maddman!

*sigh*

I don't bring up Unisystem, other people do. Like just now.

 

[Valiant]

Hobo, like I said, take a chill pill.
"So you want to make a frankly incredible statement that has no fact to back it up"
Since when does a statement need facts to back it up?

"and when someone says, "actually, I think you're wrong there" you take offense at it? Holy crap. This kind of nonsense is exactly why I don't post at ENWorld nearly as much as I used to."

With 15,000+ posts I doubt that. Look, your tone of dumbing down those who don't agree with you is rude. Your coming off as hyper. Why not say, "I disagree and here is why" rather then poisoning your message with statements that insinuate how stupid someones idea is. Which by the way others on this thread agree with to some extent. It may be you just have an acidic style of posting, and are really a good guy. If so, please read your posts as if they were directed to you. Ask would I want to recieve a comment like "So you want to make a frankly incredible statement that has no fact to back it up". Thats simply obnoxious dude...and sadly its probably the closest you can come to civil communication. :\
More reasons for you to stay clear of any posts with 1E/ODD tagged on it. Not that we don't want to hear disagreement, we do (and your general point is fine). We just don't want character assassination along with it.

 

[gizmo33]

The Car analogy does work, quite well, you just have to use a better example of Old vs New. It won't effect everyone, but it's going to cause an effect for those people that have a "soft spot" for Classics.

But does the car analogy have people driving their $100,000 antique cars to work every day? I think do pay a lot of money for old 1E books, and treasure them. But the core of their RPG experiences will rely on them? I think collecting and using are two different things, although my 1E DMG is in far better shape than most cars built at the time. Books and ideas can last forever, but DnD is as much of a technology as it is a style. If the differences between 1E and 3E were simply style I think there would be a more even distribution of people playing the different editions as there are of people listening to the various eras of rock music. But I expect the bulk of people listening to Mozart in the year 2050 will be doing so on a sound system using 2050 technology. I think that analogy describes what I mean.

 

[Korgoth]

Of course, regarding the automobile analogy, it's easy to tell which vehicle has the best performance. But that's not so easy with game systems. Some would contend that certain of the older games actually have "better performance" than the newer ones. That's not easy to measure one way or the other, but I think it's a claim that (despite common dismissive jabs to the contrary) can reasonably be made. Setting aside whether you agree with it, it's not obviously unreasonable.

 

[Valiant]

A board game (or RPG) is nothing like a car (a mostly technology and style driven product). Games like Chess, backgamon, checkers, heck even Monopoly, Life, Clue, Risk etc. work better then alot of "modern" games which (despite looking pretty) are often difficult to learn, clunky in play and loose there novelty quickly. So yeah, some of the original FRPGs (like OD&D and AD&D) work better (for certain things) then later versions (such as 3E). These systems are actually both very good at delivering there own unique feels, and I've often thought they shouldn't really be compared (more apples to oranges rather then apples to apples). For those who like customization and building PCs as well as heavy war gaming combat 3.5 is probably the way to go. For those who like fixed archetypes and a stronger DM role (where ot hit tables are used and the DM chooses how a PC saves etc.), quicker battle resolutions (esp. large battles) and less record keeping for the player (no feats or skills), 1E may be the way to go.

4E's use of the AD&D PH cover for its initial advertisement does suggest a wish to establish its roots, and perhaps reach out to those who might be looking at OSRIC and C&C.

 

[Desdichado]

Hobo, like I said, take a chill pill.

Like I said; I am chilled. You're the one trying to turn this into a heated, personal exchange. I'm just talking here. Typing to be more specific, but you get my point.

Since when does a statement need facts to back it up?

OK, well you don't need them. But if I disagree with you, and I do have at least some minimal facts (reports from WotC market research a few years ago) and you don't... sure you don't need facts to make a statement. You might want them if you want anyone to take your statement seriously, though.

With 15,000+ posts I doubt that.

I had over 15,000 posts a year and a half ago when I mostly abandoned ENWorld for Circvs Maximvs. I've hardly added to that total in the last 18 months. :shrug: I'm only back more frequently now to find out what I can about 4e, and of course that's drawing me into the same old conversations that I've been having here since 2000.

Look, your tone of dumbing down those who don't agree with you is rude. Your coming off as hyper. Why not say, "I disagree and here is why" rather then poisoning your message with statements that insinuate how stupid someones idea is. Which by the way others on this thread agree with to some extent. It may be you just have an acidic style of posting, and are really a good guy. If so, please read your posts as if they were directed to you.

I'm sorry, but I don't have a habit of catering to the over-sensitive. True; I tend to hang out on messageboards that are a bit more wild and wooly than ENWorld these days, but if you think my posts are "acidic" and "offensive" I'm going to say that's a problem with you, not with my posts. I don't think you're stupid, and I've never claimed nor implied that you were. (Well, at least not here anyway.) If you're seeing that in my posts, you're goign out of your way to find offense, and/or simply can't stand being told that you're wrong, and take it personally even though it's not personal. Pointing out stuff that you seem to be formulating theories that ignore what little we do know about the RPG market is a perfectly isn't mean-spirited. That kind of stuff happens all the time in the academic world. It's not personal dude, I just think you're wrong.

Ask would I want to recieve a comment like "So you want to make a frankly incredible statement that has no fact to back it up". Thats simply obnoxious dude...and sadly its probably the closest you can come to civil communication. :\

No, it's not obnoxious. Then again, when I'm just engaging in rank speculation without knowing anything really about what I'm talking about, I tend to be up front about it myself. I'm certainly not going to be offended when someone tells me that there's no facts to suggest that that's true. I'll gladly admit that's the case. I'm a little confused that you think I would do otherwise.

More reasons for you to stay clear of any posts with 1E/ODD tagged on it. Not that we don't want to hear disagreement, we do (and your general point is fine). We just don't want character assassination along with it.

See, now that's mean. I'm not really offended by it, but calling this character assassination is a flat-out lie and is borderline libelous. And I don't have to avoid any conversation that I'm interested in (and this isn't a 1e conversation; your own thread title clearly marked it as 4e related) and I won't on your account. And I certainly won't sit here and let you claim that I'm assassinating your character without saying something about it, because that is flat-out untrue.

 

[Piratecat]

Look, your tone of dumbing down those who don't agree with you is rude. Your coming off as hyper. Why not say, "I disagree and here is why" rather then poisoning your message with statements that insinuate how stupid someones idea is. ... Thats simply obnoxious dude...and sadly its probably the closest you can come to civil communication. :\
More reasons for you to stay clear of any posts with 1E/ODD tagged on it. Not that we don't want to hear disagreement, we do (and your general point is fine). We just don't want character assassination along with it.

This is completely out of line. If you have a problem with someone's posts, please feel free to report it to the moderators, but don't make it personal and turn it into insults or bickering. It's okay for people to disagree with one another. It's not okay to tell other people what to do or to insult them.

That's the last warning, folks. If you're rude from this point forward, expect to get summarily suspended.

If this is somehow unclear, feel free to email me by clicking on my user name.

Back to the thread, please.

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

It would be really interesting to see a bunch of people revert back to older editions - 1E, for instance. I mean, I don't see it happening but it would be kind neat to see an influx of older games being run at cons. I think it would be a real blast.

Further, imagine the fun people could have by downloaded older editions for a few bucks and having a LOT of rulesets for a very cheap and economical price.

 

[Desdichado]

It could happen, especially for one-shots and con games, where folks wouldn't mind it as a kind of nostalgic trip. I doubt it would really take off in terms of actual campaigns, but I could see a lot more older editions showing up in con games, yeah.

In fact, I think diaglo pretty much made most of his entire GenCon about running OD&D (1974) sessions for folks.

 

[Falstaff]

I really, really, hope we see a resurgence of interest in older editions of D&D. I am hoping that games like Labyrinth Lord and the upcoming OSRIC books will be the catalyst for this happening.