Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When did mixing editions become unusual?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7528050" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>I generally also concur with the overarching description of the history of the game.</p><p></p><p>Early on, almost no two tables were using the same rules. Not only did different tables ignore wide swaths of the rules or use variant resolution systems knowingly or unknowingly, but many systems borrowed from BECMI knowingly or unknowingly as well. Almost every table had a list of Dragon articles with variant rules they accepted as canon in their game, and once 2e showed up tables as often as not continued to play 1e AD&D as they knew it if they preferred it, while borrowing select ideas like new rules for Bards or Dragons if they preferred those and adding spells as the DM felt inspired to do so. Or conversely, they might switch to mostly 2e while holding over rules for Paladins, Barbarians and the like if they preferred the older characters.</p><p></p><p>3e was much more uniform, with most groups playing the core rules in some fashion. However, modularity was still a major feature of 3e, as there was an enormous amount of published material produced both by WotC and third party, and different groups accepted different books to different degrees.</p><p></p><p>4e was almost entirely monoculture, with the only variation being subtle procedures of play that most tables don't even recognize as being a part of the game.</p><p></p><p>I can't speak of 5e with a lot of confidence. While there is a lot of talk of "rulings not rules", my suspicion is that the tables nearly as monocultural as 4e with respect to mechanics, as there is simply not a lot of material out there, and 5e I think so far has very much focused on a single very popular style of play and appeals mainly to groups that play in that manner. I see nothing like the recognition that a system that works well for combat might not work so well for chases/evasion, mass combat, or what have you and I don't think that many 5e tables have yet focused on dynastic play or any of the other sorts of things that 5e simply hasn't mentioned much in the thus far published rules. However, that's all just a guess.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 7528050, member: 4937"] I generally also concur with the overarching description of the history of the game. Early on, almost no two tables were using the same rules. Not only did different tables ignore wide swaths of the rules or use variant resolution systems knowingly or unknowingly, but many systems borrowed from BECMI knowingly or unknowingly as well. Almost every table had a list of Dragon articles with variant rules they accepted as canon in their game, and once 2e showed up tables as often as not continued to play 1e AD&D as they knew it if they preferred it, while borrowing select ideas like new rules for Bards or Dragons if they preferred those and adding spells as the DM felt inspired to do so. Or conversely, they might switch to mostly 2e while holding over rules for Paladins, Barbarians and the like if they preferred the older characters. 3e was much more uniform, with most groups playing the core rules in some fashion. However, modularity was still a major feature of 3e, as there was an enormous amount of published material produced both by WotC and third party, and different groups accepted different books to different degrees. 4e was almost entirely monoculture, with the only variation being subtle procedures of play that most tables don't even recognize as being a part of the game. I can't speak of 5e with a lot of confidence. While there is a lot of talk of "rulings not rules", my suspicion is that the tables nearly as monocultural as 4e with respect to mechanics, as there is simply not a lot of material out there, and 5e I think so far has very much focused on a single very popular style of play and appeals mainly to groups that play in that manner. I see nothing like the recognition that a system that works well for combat might not work so well for chases/evasion, mass combat, or what have you and I don't think that many 5e tables have yet focused on dynastic play or any of the other sorts of things that 5e simply hasn't mentioned much in the thus far published rules. However, that's all just a guess. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When did mixing editions become unusual?
Top