Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Editions in RPGs - and why we should embrace change
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="Mercurius" data-source="post: 5629925" data-attributes="member: 59082"><p>That goes without saying, of course. But what I was trying to get at is that incompatibility isn't as big a deal as many make it out to be; furthermore, I would guess that most that cry foul with "I wasted millions of dollars on game books that are now unusable" are experienced DMs that have little problem eyeball-converting.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>True. I've had this conversation with someone here before and my view boiled down to the idea that I think it depends upon how comfortable an individual DM is with ad hocking and fiating. I do it all the time, so don't mind winging it with regards to rules conversions (as long as I have most of the leg-work done before the session, if only in terms of printing out Monster Builder sheets).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Fair enough. Speaking for myself, I'm more likely to accept new editions if they are good and offer something innovative and fresh to the D&D experience, while still retaining enough of the core elements of the game to remain "D&Dish."</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not a bad idea but I don't think it is that thought out. While economic considerations are, of course, the bottom line with an umbrella corporation as large as Hasbro watching over the shoulders of WotC game designers, I think we often forget a simple truth: Mike Mearls isn't just trying to manipulate the masses; actually, as the lead designer (which I think he is, if I'm not mistaken) his job is to develop the game, to make the best possible D&D that he can. It is the job of other people to make sure it is economically viable - in conjunction with Mearls, of course. But what we forget is that Mearls is, most likely, primarily interested in developing the game itself. I'm sure he's very aware of economics, but his attention is focused on developing the game itself.</p><p></p><p>The good news is that one of the things I hear Mearls saying is that he wants to evolve the game in a way that brings new innovations (modularity, the "complexity dial") while retaining/recovering the classic D&D feel.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mercurius, post: 5629925, member: 59082"] That goes without saying, of course. But what I was trying to get at is that incompatibility isn't as big a deal as many make it out to be; furthermore, I would guess that most that cry foul with "I wasted millions of dollars on game books that are now unusable" are experienced DMs that have little problem eyeball-converting. True. I've had this conversation with someone here before and my view boiled down to the idea that I think it depends upon how comfortable an individual DM is with ad hocking and fiating. I do it all the time, so don't mind winging it with regards to rules conversions (as long as I have most of the leg-work done before the session, if only in terms of printing out Monster Builder sheets). Fair enough. Speaking for myself, I'm more likely to accept new editions if they are good and offer something innovative and fresh to the D&D experience, while still retaining enough of the core elements of the game to remain "D&Dish." Not a bad idea but I don't think it is that thought out. While economic considerations are, of course, the bottom line with an umbrella corporation as large as Hasbro watching over the shoulders of WotC game designers, I think we often forget a simple truth: Mike Mearls isn't just trying to manipulate the masses; actually, as the lead designer (which I think he is, if I'm not mistaken) his job is to develop the game, to make the best possible D&D that he can. It is the job of other people to make sure it is economically viable - in conjunction with Mearls, of course. But what we forget is that Mearls is, most likely, primarily interested in developing the game itself. I'm sure he's very aware of economics, but his attention is focused on developing the game itself. The good news is that one of the things I hear Mearls saying is that he wants to evolve the game in a way that brings new innovations (modularity, the "complexity dial") while retaining/recovering the classic D&D feel. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Editions in RPGs - and why we should embrace change
Top