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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The-Magic-Sword" data-source="post: 8837570" data-attributes="member: 6801252">That isn't actually quite true, if you look at long running legacy textbooks changes can be aggressive, especially over multiple iterations-- the third edition of the Broadview Anthology of English Literature for example:Meanwhile the second edition saysIf similar changes will be made like this on an ongoing basis, the actual text of the first edition and the actual text of say, the fifth or sixth edition will be radically different, and this is fairly typical of this sort of work, especially as they balloon and sensibility concerning the canon changes to necessitate the inclusion of more diverse voices from the period that take the place of some of the less key writers originally included-- many academic works like this treat the name of their work as a reputation, and a role in their lineup of offerings, more than a designation of specific content. It isn't difficult to see Dungeons and Dragons in the same way, particularly when you parse the many 'editions' of early Dungeons and Dragons and see how the game is iterated on in ways that bridge the gap between the original, AD&D and so forth, and the sensibility of later editions of the game. Indeed, in most ways you can actually interpret the game as consisting of 'elements' (classes, races, etc.) that are revised, curated, and updated with new text on an ongoing basis-- the changes to the rules procedures are just revisions of how those elements interact, and revisions to the elements themselves to make them compatible with the new structures. This is part of the sensibility of why people are so passionate about returning elements and their implementation, and the things that consistently reappear can be interpreted to be part of our 'canon' (like the Assassin or the Thief which appeared immediately in the 5e handbook, and were at least somewhat represented in every edition of the game) and we lobby and dicker over whether other elements should be part of the canon (see, discussions around the Warlord) each edition of the game is curated to provide an experience, and when material returns it is revised and/or expanded to fit the new set of standards, represented by each edition's procedures. This also fits in well with someone like Collville's commentary on maps and territories, you use the games to tell similar stories (although there's a wide breadth of stories people have used them to tell) so while the rules are different, the 'game' is the same because all the changes are meant to iterate on a core experience, in the same way the "Mad Queen's Chess" was ultimately recognized as chess; the updates to the experience can be quite significant-- this sensibility towards games is even more common in the digital space, where a given video game can radically change over time via patches, but still be the 'same game' there's an interesting philosophical discussion to be hard about the ship of theseus, but there's ultimately a certain identity that all iterations of the ship of theseus share from their purpose in being the ship owned by Theseus-- sometimes that purpose can even evolve from being the ship of a man, to a symbol for the people that look up to the man, or simply a lineage and sense of continuity. Anyway, thanks for the thread, as a Librarian I love geeking out about the evolution of reference material over time, and the push and pull of what it means for different editions of the same work to change-- many librarians actually have strong feelings about changes to given works that have made them more or less useful to our patrons, so its a very engaging topic.</blockquote>

Verification