Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do we really need D&D:Next to be the One Edition?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5914905" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazg gimbatul,</p><p>Ash nazg thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul."</p><p></p><p>Sauron worked great evil upon middle-earth by crafting one master ring to bring together all others and unite them under his power.</p><p></p><p>Does WotC really need to do the same for D&D?</p><p></p><p>The 'fragmentation' of the fanbase is treated like a bad thing, but, if you think about it, isn't it ultimately just a matter of players finding groups that better fit them as gamers?</p><p></p><p>Before 4e, D&D didn't offer a balanced system not easily or badly broken by 'system mastery.' Before 3e, it didn't support the serious gamer who /did/ want to strive for system mastery, it just broke more or less at random based on the DMs mistakes and the fall of the dice. Each edition of the game was flawed, but had fans who loved it for those flaws as much as for the things it may have gotten right.</p><p></p><p>Why try to wrench devoted fans of one edition or another away from their favorite game? Why not just sell to them? Retro-clones are doing great, most notably Pathfinder, of course. There's clearly enough interest to re-print AD&D. But why stop there? Why not offer up the whole library of past D&D products, either in print, or pdf or print on demand or in full books where demand is strong enough? Why not continue to support and expand each edition for those fans who can't bear to move on from it?</p><p></p><p>Of course, we could also have a "Next" edition for organized play and continuing to trawl for new players. It could be the face of the game, the thing that's on all the store shelves, but the 'hard stuff' could be behind the counter or on order for more devoted fans, too.</p><p></p><p>D&D did well in the early 80s with three editions in print at once - OD&D, AD&D, and the Basic set - /and/ unauthorized 3pp 'Arduin Grimoire,' as well, not to mention a host of imitators and new computer RPGs. That's 4 competing versions of the game, and the game prospered. The Rules Cyclopeadia stayed in print into the 90s while 2e was being launched.</p><p></p><p>So, today, we have 3.5 and 4e and a legal analogue to 'Arduin' in Pathfinder. There's no reason WotC couldn't have rolled with that and just re-started support for 3.5 again. There's no reason they couldn't re-print AD&D (in fact, they /are/ reprinting AD&D - there's no reason they couldn't re-start support for it, as well, the demand is probably there). They could even put out edition neutral products to support all of them. And, they could count all that revenue as "D&D," in trying to hit Hasbro's impossible survival numbers.</p><p></p><p></p><p>It's not just that people have different preferences, it's that there are different styles that work better in different eds, as well. Players who like the rich setting of 2e are not only not going to like the spartan suggestion of a setting in 4e, but they're not going to like playing with other gamers who /do/ like having only a vague hand-waved history of Nerath and Arkhosia to hang their character concepts on. Players who like the consistency and balance of 4e aren't just going to be unhappy playing less-robustly balanced 3.5, they'd be unhappy playing anything at the same table with game-busting system-masters whom it attracts. </p><p></p><p>Having gamers self-select by editions into groups that get along better seems like a positive, when you think about it. </p><p></p><p>D&D Next's noble goal is to get setting buffs and tacticians and narrativists and powergamers all sitting at the same table, again - and most likely, glaring at eachother in open disgust. Doesn't sound like a lot of fun, does it?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 5914905, member: 996"] "Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazg gimbatul, Ash nazg thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul." Sauron worked great evil upon middle-earth by crafting one master ring to bring together all others and unite them under his power. Does WotC really need to do the same for D&D? The 'fragmentation' of the fanbase is treated like a bad thing, but, if you think about it, isn't it ultimately just a matter of players finding groups that better fit them as gamers? Before 4e, D&D didn't offer a balanced system not easily or badly broken by 'system mastery.' Before 3e, it didn't support the serious gamer who /did/ want to strive for system mastery, it just broke more or less at random based on the DMs mistakes and the fall of the dice. Each edition of the game was flawed, but had fans who loved it for those flaws as much as for the things it may have gotten right. Why try to wrench devoted fans of one edition or another away from their favorite game? Why not just sell to them? Retro-clones are doing great, most notably Pathfinder, of course. There's clearly enough interest to re-print AD&D. But why stop there? Why not offer up the whole library of past D&D products, either in print, or pdf or print on demand or in full books where demand is strong enough? Why not continue to support and expand each edition for those fans who can't bear to move on from it? Of course, we could also have a "Next" edition for organized play and continuing to trawl for new players. It could be the face of the game, the thing that's on all the store shelves, but the 'hard stuff' could be behind the counter or on order for more devoted fans, too. D&D did well in the early 80s with three editions in print at once - OD&D, AD&D, and the Basic set - /and/ unauthorized 3pp 'Arduin Grimoire,' as well, not to mention a host of imitators and new computer RPGs. That's 4 competing versions of the game, and the game prospered. The Rules Cyclopeadia stayed in print into the 90s while 2e was being launched. So, today, we have 3.5 and 4e and a legal analogue to 'Arduin' in Pathfinder. There's no reason WotC couldn't have rolled with that and just re-started support for 3.5 again. There's no reason they couldn't re-print AD&D (in fact, they /are/ reprinting AD&D - there's no reason they couldn't re-start support for it, as well, the demand is probably there). They could even put out edition neutral products to support all of them. And, they could count all that revenue as "D&D," in trying to hit Hasbro's impossible survival numbers. It's not just that people have different preferences, it's that there are different styles that work better in different eds, as well. Players who like the rich setting of 2e are not only not going to like the spartan suggestion of a setting in 4e, but they're not going to like playing with other gamers who /do/ like having only a vague hand-waved history of Nerath and Arkhosia to hang their character concepts on. Players who like the consistency and balance of 4e aren't just going to be unhappy playing less-robustly balanced 3.5, they'd be unhappy playing anything at the same table with game-busting system-masters whom it attracts. Having gamers self-select by editions into groups that get along better seems like a positive, when you think about it. D&D Next's noble goal is to get setting buffs and tacticians and narrativists and powergamers all sitting at the same table, again - and most likely, glaring at eachother in open disgust. Doesn't sound like a lot of fun, does it? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do we really need D&D:Next to be the One Edition?
Top