Will there ever be new editions of the major systems?

[Piperken]

...Video game systems analogy: The years between versions is increasing and it even seems that, with backwards compatibility meaning we don't need to keep rebuying the same games, we seem to be reaching a point of no new PS6 or next Xbox that is a siginicant leap in capabilities...

Kinds of video games (puzzle, simulator, fps, rts, arpg etc and more recently soulslike/roguelike/roguelites) : Kinds of TTRPGs (5e D&D, OSR, PbtA, GMless/solo, Storygames) feels more closely aligned than above.

 

[M.L. Martin]

(1) Who decided that a new edition had to be a "dramatic departure"? You?

Based on precedent, WotC. That's why, when questions of edition come up, I ask if we're using the general hobby's definition of 'edition'--'smooth out the problem spots, fold in the most popular expansion material, maybe tweak a few details'--or the WotC definition--'completely retool the game, fire half the old fans, condemn the immediately prior edition to damnatio memoriae for a timeframe ranging from a few years to forever, make grandiose claims about how the game is still the same or more the game than ever, and move another step down the road towards overt worship of Asmodeus.'

 

[Micah Sweet]

That might be true, but where that line is is going to be in the eye of the beholder. I know people sometimes swear that D&D 4e wasn't D&D, but to me, it seemed to have all the defining features of that system other than fire-and-forget spells. I don't think serious reverse compability is necessary for something to be called a new edition for example; you can change one critical core element and break that, while otherwise being clearly the same game system.

Can you provide an example?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Based on precedent, WotC. That's why, when questions of edition come up, I ask if we're using the general hobby's definition of 'edition'--'smooth out the problem spots, fold in the most popular expansion material, maybe tweak a few details'--or the WotC definition--'completely retool the game, fire half the old fans, condemn the immediately prior edition to damnatio memoriae for a timeframe ranging from a few years to forever, make grandiose claims about how the game is still the same or more the game than ever, and move another step down the road towards overt worship of Asmodeus.'

I laughing emoji'd so hard here I almost cried emoji.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Based on precedent, WotC. That's why, when questions of edition come up, I ask if we're using the general hobby's definition of 'edition'--'smooth out the problem spots, fold in the most popular expansion material, maybe tweak a few details'--or the WotC definition--'completely retool the game, fire half the old fans, condemn the immediately prior edition to damnatio memoriae for a timeframe ranging from a few years to forever, make grandiose claims about how the game is still the same or more the game than ever, and move another step down the road towards overt worship of Asmodeus.'

The problem is, even outside the D&D sphere, how different two things called "editons" are varies immensely. Heck, they can vary considerably even within the same line (contrast the differences between Runequest I and II, and between II and III).

 

[Thomas Shey]

Can you provide an example?

Since I just mentioned it--between Runequest II and III, they changed what the Size characteristic meant in terms of baselines (humans in I and II averaged around 10 in general; in III male humans (and most PC females) averaged 13 (since both games were back in the random-gen days, the first was done with 3D6 and the second with 2D6+6). This had the expected ripple effects on most other creatures that were in the approximate human scale. As such you'd have had problems using most prior characters or adventures without a rework, even though other elements of the systems (skill definition, hit point approximate range, weapon damages) were pretty close.

Similar problems could arise between Mutants and Masterminds 2e and 3e, even though the overall structure of the game didn't change much.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Since I just mentioned it--between Runequest II and III, they changed what the Size characteristic meant in terms of baselines (humans in I and II averaged around 10 in general; in III male humans (and most PC females) averaged 13 (since both games were back in the random-gen days, the first was done with 3D6 and the second with 2D6+6). This had the expected ripple effects on most other creatures that were in the approximate human scale. As such you'd have had problems using most prior characters or adventures without a rework, even though other elements of the systems (skill definition, hit point approximate range, weapon damages) were pretty close.

Similar problems could arise between Mutants and Masterminds 2e and 3e, even though the overall structure of the game didn't change much.

I'll have to take your word for it (not familiar with Runequest, or M&M 2e, although the latter seems similar enough that a bunch of folks online do conversions without too much trouble apparently).

 

[Jahydin]

Indeed

What's the name!?

 

[MichaelSomething]

What's the name!?

Uma Musaume: Cinderella Gray
Link to the official website of the IP. Has links to previous series of the franchise.

Media | Umamusume: Pretty Derby Official Website | Cygames

Welcome to the official site for the Umamusume Project. Get the latest info on all things Umamusume: Pretty Derby here!

umamusume.com

 

[Blue]

3e was a dramatic departure from 2e.
4e was a dramatic departure from 3e.
5e was a dramatic departure from 4e.

5e24, is NOT was a dramatic departure from 5e14.

Call of Cthulhu 7th edition was not a dramatic departure from, oh, let's say CoC 3rd edition.

D&D 3.5ed wasn't a dramatic departure from 3ed. It was still considered a different edition.

I put forth that "dramatic departure" is not a requirement for a new edition, even for D&D under Wizards of the Coast's stewardship.

The fact that people feel the need to specify 2014 or 2024 shows that it's not the same edition, regardless if it's "dramatic". That's the burden of proof to overcome to show it's the same edition.