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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GreyLord" data-source="post: 5710531" data-attributes="member: 4348">I guess perhaps from a certain point of veiw (like Obi Wan's certain point of view...which is contentious to say the least).As I noted, AD&D is no longer in print.  That is a current standing.My belief is that it WOULD BE in print today if someone else had gotten the rights and handled it differently.I'm trying not to imply whether that's a good or bad thing.  In regards to publication however, I think it is pretty clear on AD&D at the present time (past/future not used in this relation...though OTHERS may and should have other relation to their opinions).Hence, AD&D is not currently saved, but dead and buried...at least in regards to being printed (for the present).It is a non-competitor on the RPG scene.The same could be stated for D&D (B/X, BECMI, whatever your preference, though I think some of the retros come close...they don't hit it exactly).They currently do not compete against 4e D&D.  I suppose one could say the same for 3.X...and here you DID see my bias...as I consider 3.X still in print...though refined...in the guise of Pathfinder.A similar reference could be to the Original Star Wars pre-Special Edition changes.Now many would say there were several versions (Theatrical, original TV release) of the originals that were released and ask which of those are you referring to as the "Original" version.But most wondering about the originals are those who referencing mostly any version without the new additions put in for the Special Editions and afterwards.In Star Wars lingo, one could ask is George Lucas preserving and promoting the Original Trilogy for further enjoyment by future generations with his new releases, or is he destroying his old version in favor of the new?Is that good or bad?That's somewhat of a parallel that I'd compare to the question I asked above, but in relation to Star Wars instead of D&D...though maybe the changes to D&D through the years by WotC have culminated in a bigger change than Star Wars (caveat: Unless you ask someone who is solidly behind the idea that Han shot first and to change that changes his entire character aspect in the trilogy...or other such items from the Original Star Wars hardcore fans pre-SE release).The question is neutral, though an OOTF (Original Original Trilogy Fan) may read bias against the Original trilogy in my statements above, and a Fan of the New editions and changes may also may read bias.Despite what some may read into this, it actually is somewhat of a neutral question, and I've read some very interesting responses in the thread.From the responses I also think no one actually realizes my actual position on the issue in relation to WotC as regards to whether I think it was good/bad, or indifferent (though I did state my position on the financials I believe...probably not a good idea for me to do that...but it didn't give anything away about me or my thoughts, and in truth reading the responses people may have assumed things that were not true about me...so no damage done to the results).I tried to cover all bases for people to answer how they would in whatever manner they would.  There is no bad answer to the question though, it is open to interpretation.You can interpret it as at the time of WotC assuming control of TSR, WotC today, or even WotC/Hasbro merging.  I didn't specify when or where...just asked for one's thoughts.</blockquote>

Verification