Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 9222651" data-attributes="member: 1210">To answer the OP, I don't think D&amp;D &quot;needs&quot; edition resets, but I do think mechanical resets can offer the opportunity to improve the game more than mere 'tidying up the rules' attempts. But they can also lose things that are important to the game and change the game in really fundamental ways.&nbsp; Are edition resets good for the game? In some ways, maybe. But I don't like 'em. I mean, I do, after they come out and I'm on board and have learned the new game and what it does well and how to compensate for its weaknesses; but I don't like them in principle unless the game actually NEEDS a reset. And the thing I really dislike is when lore is changed for no good reason. Aarakocra (in their original appearance) don't make good adventurers because they have a racial claustrophobia that prevents them from going indoors. That's a great bit of wonderful flavor that has subsequently been removed for no real reason other than giving pcs a flying race to choose. Or check out the amazing lore on mind flayers and beholders in the 2e books I, Tyrant and The Illithiad. Much of that has subsequently been discarded or revised, sometimes more than once, for no real good reason. These are small things, but they are things that can really matter to long term, ongoing campaigns. Sometimes some obscure little bit of lore becomes important to the campaign&nbsp; and if it's later re-written wholesale, it can make the DM choose between invalidating part of the stuff that his players played through and discarding the new lore, making the new material less useful.So I guess my position is- if you're going to reset the rules, try to preserve the lore. There is no reason that we shouldn't still have the quasi-elemental planes. There is no reason that we should have to change the map of the campaign world due to a new edition if there weren't massive geographic changes. Add and expand, don't overwrite and undermine.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="the Jester, post: 9222651, member: 1210"] To answer the OP, I don't think D&D "needs" edition resets, but I do think mechanical resets can offer the opportunity to improve the game more than mere 'tidying up the rules' attempts. But they can also lose things that are important to the game and change the game in really fundamental ways. Are edition resets good for the game? In some ways, maybe. But I don't like 'em. I mean, I do, after they come out and I'm on board and have learned the new game and what it does well and how to compensate for its weaknesses; but I don't like them in principle unless the game actually NEEDS a reset. And the thing I really dislike is when lore is changed for no good reason. Aarakocra (in their original appearance) don't make good adventurers because they have a racial claustrophobia that prevents them from going indoors. That's a great bit of wonderful flavor that has subsequently been removed for no real reason other than giving pcs a flying race to choose. Or check out the amazing lore on mind flayers and beholders in the 2e books [I]I, Tyrant [/I]and [I]The Illithiad. [/I]Much of that has subsequently been discarded or revised, sometimes more than once, for no real good reason. These are small things, but they are things that can really matter to long term, ongoing campaigns. Sometimes some obscure little bit of lore becomes important to the campaign and if it's later re-written wholesale, it can make the DM choose between invalidating part of the stuff that his players played through and discarding the new lore, making the new material less useful. So I guess my position is- if you're going to reset the rules, try to preserve the lore. There is no reason that we shouldn't still have the quasi-elemental planes. There is no reason that we should have to change the map of the campaign world due to a new edition if there weren't massive geographic changes. Add and expand, don't overwrite and undermine. [/QUOTE]

Verification