Should WoTC Bring back Classic D&D?

[Raven Crowking]

I still don't really understand why someone can claim that bringing classic D&D back to print makes no sense, but it does make sense for so many other games to remain in print that are older than D&D.

I know. I always get the impression -- though perhaps unfairly so -- that some of the biggest "It'll split the fan base" or "Don't like it as is? Play another game!" people out there are actually worried that their favoured version isn't as popular as they'd like to believe. As though even spectacular sales of a re-released OD&D would somehow change the merits (good and bad) of the current edition.

 

[Glyfair]

I still don't really understand why someone can claim that bringing classic D&D back to print makes no sense, but it does make sense for so many other games to remain in print that are older than D&D.

How many of those "older games in print" have new editions of the game, from the same company?

 

[Valdur]

Correction: the Expert booklet covered levels 4-14. (And, yes, I'm looking at the Cook version now). A "Companion" set of levels 15-36 was planned but never eventuated, instead the entire line was reworked by Frank Mentzer two years later.

See the Basic Game and the Miniatures game.

Cheers!

Yes, you are correct it does state that. However, it also states that clerics, thieves, magic-users and fighters can advance to 36th level and the advancement tables are simple enough that one could extrapolate how to do that.

Bah! The Basic and Minatures game doesn't do what Cook/Moldvay did. I believe you even compained about it on your website. Nice article btw.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

That's why four out of five literary critics prefer Greyhawk.

The quality of Salvatore's work isn't the issue, its popularity is. He started writing Forgotten Realms novels in 1988 (The Crystal Shard, Wikipedia tells me); that means he had built up a massive fanbase over the course of a decade before the decision was made to support the Realms over Greyhawk, without even taking into account other writers' work in the Realms.

Then there's the old SSI computer games - they never did a Greyhawk game, and the 2003 Temple of Elemental Evil is apparently the only computer game ever set there. The Pools of Radiance series and the Eye of the Beholder series were pretty popular.

There had been Greyhawk novels, of course, but . . . gee, somehow I don't think even Greyhawk fans remember Rose Estes' novels all that fondly, and there were only a few written by other authors like Gygax and Andre Norton.

When you consider the larger "brand" issues, more than just sales of gaming material, it's pretty clear why the Forgotten Realms were chosen for support over Greyhawk.

 

[Umbran]

I still don't really understand why someone can claim that bringing classic D&D back to print makes no sense, but it does make sense for so many other games to remain in print that are older than D&D.

The number of older games in print alone is not really a telling statistic. There can be seventy two older games stil in print, but if they sell 3 copies each a year, that's not much of an indicator that reprinting OD&D (or something similar) makes sense.

What makes business sense depends upon the size of the publisher (among other things). A bigger company demands bigger profits, and will not be satisfied with the smaller profit margin that smaller publishers have no choice but to accept. WotC can, by dint of size and recognition, go for larger print runs and the associated economy of scale. Since it can, it would be a bad business decision to print things that wouldn't make use of that power.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

The quality of Salvatore's work isn't the issue, its popularity is.

Umm, it was a joke. As your rightly point out, the Greyhawk novels weren't exactly literary masterpieces, either.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I think SOMEBODY should bring back D&D, though not necessarily WOTC. It would work better in the hands of a small company like Kenzer or TLG imo. Scant chance of that happening, though.

 

[Odhanan]

[Monty Burns Mode]Exxxccccellent![/End Monty Burns Mode]

RC, didn't you try C&C yet?

I remember doing it before, but I'll do it again: I strongly recommend you to have a look at C&C. It will really fit the style of gaming you enjoy, in my opinion.

 

[Raven Crowking]

RC, didn't you try C&C yet?

I remember doing it before, but I'll do it again: I strongly recommend you to have a look at C&C. It will really fit the style of gaming you enjoy, in my opinion.

No, it is true. I still haven't tried C&C. My general "improvements" to D&D (houserules) so far have been mostly in the adding complexity department. Some of this complexity, of course, is designed specifically to create a reward system that focuses on roleplaying and is independent of XP and level. And while, yes, that throws the CR system out of whack a bit (a lot) I wasn't all that fond of the CR/EL system to begin with.

It's really only this thread, right here and right now, coupled with a desire to hook my seven-year-old daughter on gaming, that is making me consider a rules-lite system. Plus, I started working on my Doctor Who game, and decided that rules-lite was the way to go for it.

Overall, I think d20 is really robust, and I'd hate to see that robustness fade away. At the same time, there are a lot of niggling bits that are not as important for some types of games. How does C&C differ from D&D? I mean, what are the biggest changes?

 

[Raven Crowking]

Oh, yeah, before I forget. Odhanan, I think you mentioned using a point buy before? In another thread perhaps? Can you repeat it? Or am I misremembering? I am thinking about using point buy for Doctor Who.