I can't keep doing it

[Argyle King]

OD&D - 1974
BASIC - 1977
AD&D (1E) - 1977, '78, '79
BECMI 1981+
2E - 1989
2E Options - 1995
3E - 2000
3.5 - 2003
4E - 2008

By the time we see 5E on the shelf 4E will have run for 5 years. "Can't keep doing it"? Compared to the 3 year lifespan of 3E before 3.5 kicked it to the curb, or moving from OD&D to Basic you would have nothing to complain about. Sure, it makes one long for the days of 1E AD&D's reign of 12 years but that ended with some 35 hardcover rules books. You don't want to change systems? Don't. As was said nobody is going to burn your books. I bought the 4E core books and immediately shelved them. Bought the Pathfinder rulebook last year. Have hardly even looked at it since. That's ALL I've spent on gaming materials since 2008 and I've been playing 3.5 and 1E.

But this thing of, "can't keep doing it," suggests to me that you REALLY didn't know what this hobby involved did you? Sad that you've had such a rude awakening but I've been playing D&D since 1977 (Holmes' Basic) - 35 years. This is nothing new. THIS IS SPARTA! This is what happens when you play D&D long enough - when you play ANY RPG long enough - you are eventually faced with a choice of play the current edition, move to the new edition, move to an older edition - move to another RPG or another hobby entirely.

Don't take it personally. Whether you knew it or not, THIS IS WHAT YOU SIGNED ON FOR. Aren't you having fun yet?

If you're counting 3.5 as a new edition, it only seems fair to also count Essentials as a new edition.

 

[foolish_mortals]

I don't think we should count essentials or 4th as a new edition. I consider them "a game with dnd on the cover". I'm more likely to put Pathfinder on this list instead of anything related to 4th.

foolish_mortals


Mod Note: Folks, let us not slip into edition warring. That way lies the banhammer. ~Umbran

 

[Stormonu]

Back in the 90's, 2E felt to me and my group that the game was stuck in a rut. It was feeling arcane (in a bad way) with systems like WoD and GURPs gaining ground around it. I'd actually stopped playing D&D for a few years and was playing WoD for a bit.

3E brought me back into the game, though I was rather leery of it. It wasn't until I got to see a preview at Dragoncon that I decided I'd give it a try. Found myself really enjoying it and swearing I'd never go back to previous versions.

3.5 comes out and I'm grumping about, but happy I didn't buy the updated 3.0 books that had come out about three months earlier. Still, found I liked it once I'd read over the changes (The SRD was very helpful in that regard).

4E's announcement left me cold. I wasn't ready to move on. I wasn't finished with 3.5 - I felt like I was just warming up to it (We were in the middle of a pirate campaign when it was announced. Pirates! You hear me WotC?!?). Never really enjoyed it when it was forced upon me by my players and when Pathfinder came out, I took it up. I'm running Rise of the Runelords with it, which was made with 3.5 rules. I'm loving it, for now.

Then comes the announcement of 5E. I don't need this edition, I've got Pathfinder. But I find myself wanting to be involved with it. See it become the best D&D so far. I don't need this edition, but I'll buy into it if it turns my fancy.

But I'll move when I'm ready to, not when WotC tells me to jump ship.

 

[Spinachcat]

You know why gamers fear changing editions? Because I come their house and burn all their old books! Yes, its time to admit it. I'm that Pyro Santa Claus who sneaks into houses of naughty gamers who don't immediately pre-order the newest edition and BLAMMO their old collection goes up in smoke.

Y'all been warned.

On a serious note, I dare you to compare the dollar to hour ratio you get from RPGs versus your other hobbies. Compare the cost to a movie, concert, DVD, or novel.

If you play with any regularity, you will find that RPG books are ridiculously cheap. My 4e books are easily under $1/hour for the entertainment I have gained from them.

 

[Hassassin]

Re: 3e vs. 3.5, they were so compatible that we are still using some 3e rules because we haven't noticed they've changed it. Every once in a while someone takes a level and goes "did you notice heal has a limit on hp healed?" since none of us has systematically read through the 3.5 books.

 

[bouncyhead]

Re: 3e vs. 3.5, they were so compatible that we are still using some 3e rules because we haven't noticed they've changed it. Every once in a while someone takes a level and goes "did you notice heal has a limit on hp healed?" since none of us has systematically read through the 3.5 books.

We had a mix of 3 and 3.5 books at the table, then 3.5 and PF Beta books, then full PF. If you don't sweat the small stuff you hardly notice.

That said, I hardly touch the books any more and have DM'd off the SRD and now the PFSRD for years now.

 

[vagabundo]

If you're counting 3.5 as a new edition, it only seems fair to also count Essentials as a new edition.

You can have essential characters and core characters in the same game, using the same feats and spells etc..

Not sure how well 3.0 and 3.5 mix. Not very I'd imagine.

Essentials was an addition to 4th not 4.5e

 

[hanez]

Not sure how well 3.0 and 3.5 mix. Not very I'd imagine.

They played fine in my campaign.. I barely know the changes they made. They were changes sure... they tweaked the ranger a bit for example, but unless you were very very rule based you could use either version in a game without noticing.

 

[AeroDm]

A key change over time (in my experience) has also been the attitude of the player base towards the products. In 2e, almost everyone I gamed with viewed themselves as a collector of D&D products. If we saw an old module on sale, we picked it up just to have it knowing we'd never run it. When 3e came out we saw it as a great opportunity to be collectors from day one and just assumed we'd purchase most new books. There were a lot of books, some duds, and so by 3.5 we had winnowed back to just buying the good stuff. With 4e, the attitude shifted even further towards, "I'll buy what I need."

Certainly the time between editions has shortened, but it hasn't gotten *that* much shorter. What has changed (or at least feels like it changed) is the number of books, the price of books, and the content of those books. In some ways up and others down, but it feels like the investmentayout ratio has diminished over time.

 

[Alzrius]

OD&D - 1974
BASIC - 1977
AD&D (1E) - 1977, '78, '79
BECMI 1981+
2E - 1989
2E Options - 1995
3E - 2000
3.5 - 2003
4E - 2008

Okay, let's put this in some differing context.

OD&D did find itself replaced by 1E after about five years (when the last of the "three Core Rulebooks" came out in '79), that's true.

BECMI, however, did not see the end of 1E; it was published as a different game, concurrent with AD&D.

The 2E "options" books were just that, options - they were supplements, just like all of the other 2E supplements, and really don't need to be on this list.

So I think what the OP meant was:

1E - 1979
2E - 1989
3E - 2000
3.5E - 2003 (I count this as a separate edition, since it required purchasing the Core Rulebooks again)
4E - 2008
4E Essentials - 2010 (admittedly, this one is questionable, but I know some 4E players who feel this way)

Hence, 1E lasted a decade, and 2E lasted a comparable length of time. We thought 3E would get the same treatment, only for things to last half that long...if we're lucky.

So yeah, I sympathize with the OP.