Grognard view of One D&D?

[Eltab]

If WotC puts a "Grognards had BadWrongFun" blanket disclaimer on the 5e material like they did for everything 3.5 and prior, I will conclude they are trying to drive me away.

OTOH, if they can recognize that playstyles and materials have been a learning curve over time, I will be able to continue dealing with being part of the smaller-headcount group in the game.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Note in your whole reply in your last post, you did not type the word fun.....not even once. You were much more concerned about so many other things. You say it should be fun, but don't seem to have that on the mind.

And it's still the problem: just make a fun game and ignore the rest.

This still attempts to ignore that what will make something a "fun game" is not the same for everyone. There's no standard metric for what in game book will be viewed as "fun".

 

[Smackpixi]

So what do we, the Older Edition community, think of One D&D?

My initial thoughts on a new edition are: Please don’t. With the exception of 3 & 5, the number of players in new editions has been smaller than the edition before - 50/50 chance that it hurts the long term prospects for the game. And new editions divide the community everytime it seems.

I’m not a 5e fan, but I’m hoping for their sake it‘s nearly unnoticeable like 3e to 3.5e.

I suspect WotC has absolutely no interest in Older Edition fans, so I don’t suspect it’ll bring us back into the fold (whichever Older Editions we prefer), but whatever One D&D is, I’ll buy the PHB and presumably play it occasionally with someone else DMing … and learn to convert some of the avalanche of new material backwards.

8 years between editions isn’t much when your campaigns last decades … yup, I’m definitely not the audience,

Um, why with the, not exactly persecution complex but, the bizarre antagonism and expectation that there will be something new for fans of a game that hasn’t been published in 40, 30, or 20 years?

it‘s obvious if you didn’t like 5e, you’re not going to like what comes next, as they’re pretty explicit about it being more of the same.

it’ts real bizarre to me that “they don’t care about fans of older editions” is a thing. Like, it’s like complaining in an Apple forum about, another year, another missed opportunity to release an update for the IIc operating system, why doesn’t Apple care about fans of their legacy products?

WotC has done more for fans of long forgotten products than most companies, they’re putting out pdfs and PoD for tons of old stuff that only weirdos play any more. Saves you the effort of tracking down free online scans of them.

you’ll always be welcomed back into the fold if you ever want to stop being like those weirdo Japanese soldiers who fought in the hills for 20 years after the war was over. Wanna play the game we’re playing now?

except you’re not alone, there’s plenty of people who want to play the game you’re playing and are making new stuff for it. Have fun.

just stop bothering people with moping sadness about the equivalent of Nintendo not releasing new SNES carts.

 

[Jahydin]

@Smackpixi
Persecution complex?

@haakon1 sounded pretty understanding and reasonable to me...

 

[ThrorII]

A grognard here. Started in 1978 on Holmes. Played AD&D, then started again with v3.5, then 5E.

We dropped v3.5 because of the crunch - especially at high levels, and that it took hours to prep a session as a DM. We went to Castles & Crusades and loved it.

When 5E came along, we jumped in. While the core mechanics are probably the best ever, it was too high magic for us. Every class has a magic option, cantrips are everywhere and too useful. We were tired of every class having a new shiny tool every level. Healing was a joke to us. We ran it with just the Core Four races and classes, no feats. That still wasn't 'old school' enough for us.

We have been playing B/X for 5 years now, and will never play anything else.

So, no, I will not be buying it or playing it.

 

[Smackpixi]

@Smackpixi
Persecution complex?

@haakon1 sounded pretty understanding and reasonable to me...

Reasonable? What’s reasonable about expecting a company to support your efforts to play a game they haven’t made in 30+ years? What’s reasonable in being salty with them when thay actually have by making legacy products available? What’s reasonable about expecting the company that’s moved on to cater to you when there’s a whole wide universe of others who are providing exactly what you want? why complain when everything you want is available?

 

[Tutara]

I’ll buy a PHB to check it out and be able to play when someone wants to run the current edition.

There’s a big difference between buying a $50 PHB to be an occasional player, and actually supporting an edition.

For 3e, I have hundreds of books and have DM’d campaigns for 20 years with dozens of players.

My question was asked in earnest, so thank you for replying in the same vein. I can understand the pull of having something 'just in case', so fair enough.

To mine ideas from, for my own game. Spells and monsters, mostly.

I've bought the core three for each of 2e 3e 4e and 5e at around the time of their release, and have never* DMed any of them. I have, however, swiped or tweaked some ideas from each, and having the core books gives me a better idea of what to expect when I convert that edition's adventures. I didn't buy 3.5e or PF and probably won't bother with 5.5 unless it's hella different from 5e, which is not the current projection.

* - other than three sessions of 3.5e when I briefly took over an existing game as a shared joke on the other players by me and the main DM.

As to the other poster, thank you for the considered reply. I am actually the same but opposite - having got around to actual tabletop play later in life I mine the older editions and reverse-engineer bits and pieces I like for the newer versions of a game system, so this also makes sense to me.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

If WotC puts a "Grognards had BadWrongFun" blanket disclaimer on the 5e material like they did for everything 3.5 and prior, I will conclude they are trying to drive me away.

Mod Note:

Equating a disclaimer about some material being potentially racially insensitive/based on RW bigotry with “badwrongfun“ is a good way to get a vacation.

ARE. WE. CLEAR?

 

[GuyBoy]

Played since 1976 so maybe a grognard in terms of time?
My grognard definition is more about warmth of nostalgia and memory than it is about rejecting anything new.
I loved the White Box and 1E and have great warmth towards the early adventures (roll on that 50th Anniversary Greyhawk and Tsojcanth/Tharizdun super-adventure!) but I play 5E nowadays (and Level Up online, which is also great) and love the system.
From what I’ve seen so far, I anticipate loving One D&D too. Looking forward to trialling the system in the Scarlet Citadel campaign I’ll be starting in a couple weeks time.
To me, it’s easy enough to just agree a lower magic style or whatever you want, if that’s your bag.

I understand that WOTC is a company out to make money but I’ve never felt abandoned by them even when our group decided against 4E and played Pathfinder till 5E came along.
I’m a little saddened that some less pleasant people with an agenda have attempted to hijack aspects of grognard is to score anti-inclusive points (here’s looking at NuTSR), but that won’t stop me exploring White Plume Mountain......using the new rules system.

 

[Jahydin]

Reasonable? What’s reasonable about expecting a company to support your efforts to play a game they haven’t made in 30+ years? What’s reasonable in being salty with them when thay actually have by making legacy products available? What’s reasonable about expecting the company that’s moved on to cater to you when there’s a whole wide universe of others who are providing exactly what you want? why complain when everything you want is available?

None of those statements were made and there was only a pinch of salt. He even said he was going to purchase the book and give it a shot.

Good grief...