Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7667313" data-attributes="member: 42582">I see the point, but I'm not sure I completely agree.First, on settings, how much of a setting is mechanically determined? For Greyhawk, the answer is "bugger all". The god stats can be safely ignored; and other than that, you have stats for some NPCs, many of which are abbreviated to a significant extent (in the original boxed set, to class and level). What you're really buying the setting for is maps, geography, history, cultures etc - all of which are useable without worrying about mechanics.Al-Qadim might have more mechanically-dependent stuff, and hence harder to convert - but on the flip side I think the likelihood of a newbie stumbling into Al-Qadim without knowing what s/he is getting into is fairly remote!Modules can be more of a challenge for conversion, too, though many of the classic modules aren't all that sophisticated in their encounter design. I think adjusting the treasure rewards (often very profligate by contemporary standards, because of the XP rules) might be the bigger challenge for some of them!Maybe, though maybe we can also reason backwards: if WotC feels that there is not overwhelming demand for conversion documents, this might show that (i) people are buying and using the old stuff without the need for it, and/or (ii) they're happy for the interwebs to carry the load of converting material (I haven't looked around for conversions, but by now they must be out there!), and/or (iii) the evidence suggests that new 5e players are not looking for the sort of setting/adventure support that would require conversion.I don't know, but I would suspect that a lot of new players aren't looking for setting/adventure support beyond what WotC is providing (ie their FR APs), and that WotC figures that existing players already have the material they need, or will buy it from DriveThru.Not much more than conjecture, of course!</blockquote>

Verification