Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Salamandyr" data-source="post: 5105534" data-attributes="member: 40233">This is actually a more interesting concept than I originally gave it credit for.  I think the original poster does not give enough credit to the gamers of the 70's.Eberron is not that original.  In fact, by the time it appeared, it actually seemed a bit like the logical progression of the way games seemed to be pushing itself anyway, what with the ubiquitous magic, the item shops, and the way conversations revolved around the world D&D constructed, rather than if D&D reflected the world.  Modern technology, only powered by magic, isn't that new a thing.Would 4e have caught on back then?  I'm not sure.  For one thing the seeds of D&D germinated in the minds of simulationist wargamers.  While 0 & 1st edition D&D was very abstract, it was still intended to model a real world, albeit a real world with something extra (magic).  I don't think the early gamers would have been as friendly to a game that placed its own rule structure ahead of imaginable physical consequences. (essentially, when the old games failed to accurately model reality, it was an accident; when 4e does so, it is by design).  However, I think if the 4e rules were introduced to the 2nd generation gamers, the ones who discovered the game in the early 80's, from watching the cartoon, or being entranced by Conan the Barbarian or Excalibur, now those guys would have liked something like 4e.  But even then, I think the theatricality of it all would be toned down, much as the action movies of the 80's tend to be less outlandish than the Hong Kong inspired action movies of today.Early gamers would have little trouble accommodating demon blooded player characters, vampires, or even dragons.  In fact, the very first version of D&D included (very sketchy) rules for playing monsters as characters.  Early gamers might be interested in playing one of the Green Men of Mars.  But ultimately I think they would prefer to keep a humanocentric world, unlike 4e's default assumption.  After all, what is the point of creating a character forced to live with the temptations of his demonic forebears, when the barkeep at the inn is a lycanthrope, the mayor is the scion of a underworld race, the hostler is a mechanical man, the local priest is possessed by the mind of an alien creature, and the princess you save might just be a race of animate rock.  In other words, when everyone is "special", no one is.  4e's "every race is common and accepted" is a wonderful way to sell books, but it's not very good from a storytelling standpoint.Considering the average wealth in the 70's & 80's being less than today, I'm not sure the expansion pack nature of D&D would have been all that appealling.  As to random attribute generation...there are people today who still play this way.  Personally, I prefer point buy, but I can play in a random generation game.</blockquote>

Verification