Mearls' Legends and Lore (or, "All Roads Lead to Rome, Redux")
- Thread starter Mercurius
- Start date
I agree- the only edition of HERO I can think of that most players hate was the FUZION version. For the most part, people who like the old stuff like most of the new stuff. Sure, there are occasional gripes- I miss some things from 5Ed that got the axe in 6th- but by & large, the disagreements & dissatisfactions across the editions of THAT game are pretty minor.
I'm sure there are fans of other multi-editional systems that would say likewise of some of their favorite games. To date, 4Ed D&D is the only one I've noticed where things got nasty.
With the transition from 2Ed to 3Ed, I noticed some of my fellow gamers balk at changing...but they were concerned largely about 2 things: the change in the math and the costs. But they weren't angry.
Gryph
First Post
The edition history of D&D is fairly adversarial at an organizational level. 2e was largely a result of the forced ouster of Gary Gygax and the perceived need of a product they wouldn't have to pay royalties on. Adkinson may have had a lot of love for D&D when he bought TSR for WoTC, but I'm not sure the 3e designers did. I don't think anyone believes Hasbro bought WoTC out of an overwhelming love of D&D.
He don't know nothin' 'bout colorin' no films.
Either that, or he frankly doesn't give a darn.
My sense from having been at WotC when they designed 3rd edition was that, of the core design team, Monte Cook and Skip Williams pretty obviously had "overwhelming love" for D&D, and that Jonathan Tweet (who was already at WotC when they acquired TSR) was honored by the challenge of redesigning the industry's flagship game, though he was perhaps a bit less enamored with the sacred cows of the game than the other two.
Pretty much all of the designers there in 1999 "loved" D&D, as far as I could tell. That was in no way a problem.
--Erik
pawsplay
Hero
It is. Typically, it requires a fairly consistent program of adversarial actions in order to create conflict out of such a situation. It's not really something that is likely to happen spontaneously.
Mournblade94
Hero
Warhammer despite its jump with 3rd edition did not seem to fracture those players. I have not played the new warhammer, I am not that interested in it honestly, but I know most players of Warhammer seem to like it. I don't like the boardgame direction of the game, so I have not invested time into it. ( I like boardgames, I play many of them I am just not interested in a RPG-Boardgame reduction reaction).
Whatever FF did to keep their marketshare they did correctly. Then again they did not have ANOTHER game company supporting a better edition. I think if not for Pathfinder lots of the old 3rd ed crowd may have eventually given in to 4e, or at least a sizeable portion of them would have.
Whatever FF did to keep their marketshare they did correctly. Then again they did not have ANOTHER game company supporting a better edition. I think if not for Pathfinder lots of the old 3rd ed crowd may have eventually given in to 4e, or at least a sizeable portion of them would have.
pawsplay
Hero
If Pathfinder did not exist, it would have been necessary to invent it.
Similar Threads
