Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Maggan" data-source="post: 3266084" data-attributes="member: 6616">Okay, so if WotC rerelsead AD&D2nd edition ... would that be worthy of the name D&D?Or do you call that something else as well? I'm curious as to where the line is drawn. Hackmaster is based on AD&D both in rules and style, but yet would not be worthy of the D&D name. So a rule set would have to hew so very, very closely to one of the earlier editions that only a verbatim reprint of said edition would satisfy the definition.And I'm really curios as to whether the vocal "D&D3e is not D&D" crowd would agree on which edition best encapsulates the feeling of "D&D" if we were to make a poll. It's easy enough to be united in defiance against one cause, but often when looking closer at what unites people, it's not as clear cut as one might think.For me, the quintessential D&D experience is the red Basic D&D box, with the Blue Expert box and the Companion set. To me, that is the essence of D&D, and if I were to opt for a straight reprint of one earlier edition, that would be it.Would that be D&D to you?/M</blockquote>