dave2008
Legend
Not off the top of my head.Huh. This is an interesting loophole. Do you have any examples of folks doing this to get older rules into their products?
Not off the top of my head.Huh. This is an interesting loophole. Do you have any examples of folks doing this to get older rules into their products?
Maybe because he cares. He sounds like a nice guy.That's neat and all...but, 1) doesn't he have better things to do...like literally anything involving life, and; 2) why give the whiny gatekeepers the attention?
Keymaster?
Pssst... when someone asks you if you're a god, you say "yes"!Are you a god?
The disclaimer on some of the older products on DMs Guild seems to be the biggest point I've seen with where a lot of older gamers take issue. The original product is there and completely intact (no alterations to the actual original work), and it's not throwing people under the bus or disrespectful to explain that ideas within would be products of their own time.
I think it's largely a generational gap-thing, where the younger generations would notice obvious issues if they were to read through some of the older products today, where the older generation lived through that time and automatically associate it with the time it was printed in (or in some cases, don't see any issue with some of those elements which... is it's own problem we don't need to get into at the moment). It's a good thing to remind a newer audience the context of when they were written.
I really wasn't thinking of older products at all. Specifically, I was thinking about the Campaign Guides line. When 5E first came out, there seemed to be a ton of buzz over what classical settings would be released; Planescape for instance, according to Mearls, was "on the radar"! But over the years we've seen 5 new settings (3 MtG, a Penny Arcade, a Critical Role setting), Ebberon (a 3E setting), and another Ravenloft product (cool, but a bit of a bummer since we already had the Curse adventure and its re-release version). A bit disappointing for older fans.
My line about being "embarrassed of the past" was mostly in regards to WotC breaking away from Dragonlance and its creators over problematic material. I think that was a pretty good indication of how strongly they felt about Classical D&D considering the time, money, and energy that took...
Maybe not though? It seems to me they realized there was some neglect since they announced that 3 classical settings were in the works. I guess we'll wait and see if they stick close enough to the material to get the old fans to buy books again.
Are you a god?
Pssst... when someone asks you if you're a god, you say "yes"!
I just re-watched this about a week ago. Still such a fun film.What is it Ray!
It's the stay puffed marshmallow man.
Isn't that just a fancy term for "locksmith"?Keymaster?
The adventures are not lost on me. That's why I said the Campaign Guides specifically. It would be nice to see more classical settings in that format rather than in a mega adventure. For those that like to write their own adventures, they're just more useful. Again, nothing to do with the disclaimer issue.So . . . . since not every product is a repackaging of an older setting, some are new . . . that's somehow abandoning older fans?
Regarding Dragonlance, you know not of which you speak. Simply because, none of us do. You are basing your opinions on rumors. And your problem with the supposed situation is the same problem as others have with the disclaimers on the older products on the Guild? Gotcha.
The fact that most of the hardcover adventures harken back to classic old-school modules is lost on you? The reboot of Ravenloft? Ghosts of Saltmarsh?
WotC isn't catering SOLELY to older fans, that doesn't equate to abandoning them. WotC loves you. But it's not all about you, either.