Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Xetheral" data-source="post: 7193881" data-attributes="member: 6802765">I don't find it helpful when designers publish a new edition of an existing game and treat it like it's "its own game". I consider D&D to be a toolset I can use to help run the game at my table. Like any set of tools, I expect new versions of D&D to be useful for the same tasks as the old version. To me, that means I should ideally be able to use the new rules to run the same style of games I did before, in the same campaign worlds, and with the same character concepts. That is, of course, only the ideal, and in practice one can never expect a new version of a tool (whether it be a roleplaying game or productivity software) to remain completely backwards-compatible and still have sufficient changes to be a noticable upgrade.Ultimately, I think it's entirely valid to praise or criticise a new edition based on how useful it is for running the same games as the previous edition. To me, that's part of what being a new edition means. If a new ruleset is intended to be "its own game" then I think it should be published as a new game, and not as a new edition of an existing game.I realize that many people disagree with me, and that's fine. I'm probably somewhat idiosyncratic in thinking of D&D as primarily a tool rather than as a game itself. Accordingly, I may be in the minority with my preference for a D&D upgrade path that more closely resembles the development cycle of productivity software rather than the successive stand-alone titles of a videogame franchise.</blockquote>

Verification