Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TrippyHippy" data-source="post: 6235848" data-attributes="member: 27252">I think 'multi-platform' simply alludes to the point that the D&amp;D brand is worth more to WotC/Hasbro than the profits of the game itself. You can read all sorts of articles, reports or reviews in all sorts of sources that utilize 'D&amp;D' as a fairly universally understood term. The game is considered to be significant, in game design terms, beyond the sub-genre RPG hobby it spawned. Computer-based and board games probably sell a lot more these days, but sticking the 'D&amp;D' brand on them requires that you have a core game from whence they come from.&nbsp; As such, their design policy was as much convincing gamers that it was 'the real D&amp;D' as much as anything else. Having read and played the play test, and seen some of their preview modules, the game does indeed look like classic D&amp;D. Although people may have quibbles with certain rules aspects (including myself - +1 to all human stats!..grrr..), the basic design precepts have been successfully met. There has been something of a trend in recent years for new games essentially trying to replicate the experience of old 'classics' using new mechanics. D&amp;D has had Pathfinder, Castles and Crusades, Dungeon World, 13th Age, Dungeon World Classics, and so on. Other games have also seen clones. If there is one wish of mine for D&amp;D is that we see game designers actually consolidate a little, rather than keeping splintering off all the time. While having lots of games can be seen as a creative pool of competition (which is good), it can also be divisive (&quot;I won't play that version of D&amp;D, only my personal favorite!&quot;). It also channels the creativity of the hobby away from other areas - new setting design and world creation for example. For me the RPG of the year was Numenara. It wasn't necessarily a game for me, but it was significant because it was very much focused on the original setting, rather than putting heavy emphasis on innovative mechanics. And it was hugely successful. If you look at the games made over the last decade or so, the emphasis has generally been on mechanics (the whole 'System matters' hullabaloo), with original setting based games few and far between. Maybe, these trends are going to change in the aftermath of D&amp;DNext.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TrippyHippy, post: 6235848, member: 27252"] I think 'multi-platform' simply alludes to the point that the D&D brand is worth more to WotC/Hasbro than the profits of the game itself. You can read all sorts of articles, reports or reviews in all sorts of sources that utilize 'D&D' as a fairly universally understood term. The game is considered to be significant, in game design terms, beyond the sub-genre RPG hobby it spawned. Computer-based and board games probably sell a lot more these days, but sticking the 'D&D' brand on them requires that you have a core game from whence they come from. As such, their design policy was as much convincing gamers that it was 'the real D&D' as much as anything else. Having read and played the play test, and seen some of their preview modules, the game does indeed [I]look[/I] like classic D&D. Although people may have quibbles with certain rules aspects (including myself - +1 to all human stats!..grrr..), the basic design precepts have been successfully met. There has been something of a trend in recent years for new games essentially trying to replicate the experience of old 'classics' using new mechanics. D&D has had Pathfinder, Castles and Crusades, Dungeon World, 13th Age, Dungeon World Classics, and so on. Other games have also seen clones. If there is one wish of mine for D&D is that we see game designers actually consolidate a little, rather than keeping splintering off all the time. While having lots of games can be seen as a creative pool of competition (which is good), it can also be divisive ("I won't play [I]that[/I] version of D&D, only my personal favorite!"). It also channels the creativity of the hobby away from other areas - new setting design and world creation for example. For me the RPG of the year was Numenara. It wasn't necessarily a game for me, but it was significant because it was very much focused on the original setting, rather than putting heavy emphasis on innovative mechanics. And it was hugely successful. If you look at the games made over the last decade or so, the emphasis has generally been on mechanics (the whole 'System matters' hullabaloo), with original setting based games few and far between. Maybe, these trends are going to change in the aftermath of D&DNext. [/QUOTE]

Verification