Sunday Chat: What New Editions Were Upgrades? Which Ones Were Downgrades?

[Reynard]

TTRPGs get new editions on a regular basis, and often times those new editions have significant changes. When this works, awesome! But when it doesn't, it can be frustrating (especially since a new edition usually means the old edition is no longer going to be supported).

For you personally, what new editions were real upgrades and improvements (mechanically, narratively, artistically, whatever)? By contrast, what new editions were downgrades in your estimation? And what about hose "meh" editions where things are still different, but not especially good or bad.

One thing I would like to head off right here: NO EDITION WARRING. Certain editions tend to be very divisive. We all know what they are. So maybe don't come in hot with that stuff? Thanks.

For my part, one of my favorite edition upgrades is Mutants and Masterminds 2E. It is superior to 1E in nearly every way (there is some hero point wonkiness), and the game got prettier and better supported in the 2E era, finally really replacing Champions for me and my supers gamers.

 

[bedir than]

I haven't played it, but just in reading the modern Free League version of Twilight: 2000 I know it's better, by far, than the original I played 30 years ago.

It avoids that mid-80s to early-90s desire to solve every problem with more numbers quite elegantly.

I still wish they put that same engine out for modern spy/action thriller stuff.

 

[Reynard]

I haven't played it, but just in reading the modern Free League version of Twilight: 2000 I know it's better, by far, than the original I played 30 years ago.

It avoids that mid-80s to early-90s desire to solve every problem with more numbers quite elegantly.

I still wish they put that same engine out for modern spy/action thriller stuff.

That's interesting: does something like the new version of TW2000 count as a "new edition" or a "new game"? Like, is Shadowrun Anarchy a "new edition" of Shadowrun?

 

[aramis erak]

For me, Several editions have been downgrades

TOR 2e was a downgrade to me. It nerfed Traits, reduced the benefit of hope spends, forced hope to be before rolling.

Twilight 2000 2.2 was a mixed bag going from 2.0's 3 explicit and 5 total difficulties to 2.2's 5 and 7, respectively was good, but the move from 1d10 ≤ skill to 1d20 ≤ att+skill wasn't. Around my birthday, Marc uploaded 2.0 to Drivethru...

Arrowflight 2e was a HUGE downgrade... it nerfed starting characters pretty badly by moving from Deep7's DEEP engine to their XPg engine. Roughly halved success rates, accounting for difficulty mods. 3rd retains the XPg engine. Brilliant setting, tho'. 2nd presents it better than 1st, while ruining the game portion.

Every Traveller named edition (except the CT subeditions: 1.0 aka 1977, 2.0 aka 1981, 2.1 aka TTB, and 2.2 aka Starter Traveller) is a mostly different game engine. This is part of why Traveller's long noted for edition wars. whether each is good or not is a personal issue; I found T4 especially unpleasant to use, and TNE a bit unpleasant, but due to task system issues.

Pendragon 5th ed... dropped the magic system from 4th. Strictly a downgrade on capability.

 

[Micah Sweet]

TTRPGs get new editions on a regular basis, and often times those new editions have significant changes. When this works, awesome! But when it doesn't, it can be frustrating (especially since a new edition usually means the old edition is no longer going to be supported).

For you personally, what new editions were real upgrades and improvements (mechanically, narratively, artistically, whatever)? By contrast, what new editions were downgrades in your estimation? And what about hose "meh" editions where things are still different, but not especially good or bad.

One thing I would like to head off right here: NO EDITION WARRING. Certain editions tend to be very divisive. We all know what they are. So maybe don't come in hot with that stuff? Thanks.

For my part, one of my favorite edition upgrades is Mutants and Masterminds 2E. It is superior to 1E in nearly every way (there is some hero point wonkiness), and the game got prettier and better supported in the 2E era, finally really replacing Champions for me and my supers gamers.

I think Cyberpunk 2020 was a better game than 2013, and could bring in the old stuff anyway due to backwards compatibility. I can't say the same for later developments of the game line.

I like AD&D 2e more than 1e, with the same compatibility note. I think Legend of the Five Ring's best version was AEG's 4e (the last before they sold the license to FFG). Same with the second edition of Star Trek Adventures. I prefer smallish iterations on good existing systems basically. Making a whole new game can be fine, so long as a different company makes it, so it doesn't feel like it's intentionally trying to scrub the previous version from existence. That always been D&D's problem IMO.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's interesting: does something like the new version of TW2000 count as a "new edition" or a "new game"? Like, is Shadowrun Anarchy a "new edition" of Shadowrun?

Hard to say. I know I consider 3e, 4e, and 5e D&D as new games rather than new editions. I feel FFG's versions of L5R are new games.

New system. New lore. New game.

 

[Micah Sweet]

For me, Several editions have been downgrades

TOR 2e was a downgrade to me. It nerfed Traits, reduced the benefit of hope spends, forced hope to be before rolling.

Twilight 2000 2.2 was a mixed bag going from 2.0's 3 explicit and 5 total difficulties to 2.2's 5 and 7, respectively was good, but the move from 1d10 ≤ skill to 1d20 ≤ att+skill wasn't. Around my birthday, Marc uploaded 2.0 to Drivethru...

Arrowflight 2e was a HUGE downgrade... it nerfed starting characters pretty badly by moving from Deep7's DEEP engine to their XPg engine. Roughly halved success rates, accounting for difficulty mods. 3rd retains the XPg engine. Brilliant setting, tho'. 2nd presents it better than 1st, while ruining the game portion.

Every Traveller named edition (except the CT subeditions: 1.0 aka 1977, 2.0 aka 1981, 2.1 aka TTB, and 2.2 aka Starter Traveller) is a mostly different game engine. This is part of why Traveller's long noted for edition wars. whether each is good or not is a personal issue; I found T4 especially unpleasant to use, and TNE a bit unpleasant, but due to task system issues.

Pendragon 5th ed... dropped the magic system from 4th. Strictly a downgrade on capability.

Trying to be positive, but 7th Sea is a prime example for me of a game that got markedly worse with a new edition.

 

[payn]

Mongoose Traveller was a nice reprint of classic Traveller with a few updates. Mongoose 2E Traveller was just loads of better stuff. From chargen to ship combat, while keeping (IMO) the spirit of the game well intact.

PF1 from 3E was an upgrade. I liked a lot of the stuff Paizo put out and it gelled well with my own homebrew instincts.

While I think the word "downgrades" isnt accurate, I didnt like 4E or PF2. I think both of those are designed well, they just dont supply me with the experience im after. More of a preference thing than a think they are poorly executed thing.

 

[Voidmoji]

I consider GURPS 4e an all around upgrade. While the text book nature of the rules make it a less fun read, I like how it all comes together in two books. I have come back to GURPS after a 20+ year break from the system, and am considering running it after my current SotWW games end. I never would have come back if the game was still 3e.