|
Post by robertsconley on Aug 6, 2014 7:12:36 GMT -6
Exactly. I bought WEG Star Wars because it was the first. I bought WOTC SW d20 because that's what was being played in the group and I wanted to ref. I bought Star Wars SAGA because it was supposed to be a totally new and better game. I regret 2 out of the 3. WEG is the only one I don't regret. Also, hands up if you can discern the difference between 'Buying a licensed game from 2 different manufacturers' and 'buying later editions of the same game.' The above makes sense and anyways explains to be me why you don't buy later editions of D&D. You have a group that plays OD&D and everybody is happy with it. The situation with Star Wars different thus the multiple editions you bought.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Aug 6, 2014 7:21:36 GMT -6
Okay, so why? What is in there that would make me want to ref it instead of OD&D? First off I don't what will make you want to ref something. I think it worth your time because in my opinion it is the edition of D&D that is most similar to OD&D in how it plays. And I am talking about actual play comparison. I ran campaigns with OD&D and I run enough session with 5e to see the similarities in how they play. This doesn't mean that 5e achieves this in the same way that OD&D does.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2014 22:49:29 GMT -6
Okay, fine. But it "is the edition of D&D that is most similar to OD&D in how it plays." Um, actually, OD&D is that edition.
And I don't know anybody who "only plays the latest and greatest and therefore won't play in my OD&D game," nor would I care if I did.
The question remains, why should I care? Why should the fact that it plays similar to OD&D interest me? I already HAVE a game that plays like OD&D.
"You like cherry pie? This tastes similar to cherry pie!" "But .... I have a cherry pie right here!"
If somebody else ran it, I'd play it; I'll play d**n near anything. But if I can't play without knowing the rules first, I'm not interested.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Aug 7, 2014 8:24:59 GMT -6
Okay, fine. But it "is the edition of D&D that is most similar to OD&D in how it plays." Um, actually, OD&D is that edition. I should have worded it "of all the edition OTHER than OD&D it is the one that plays the closest to the original edition". What you do with my opinion is up to you. It it doesn't interest than it doesn't. If you want to see if it true the PDF for the basic game is free to download. The question remains, why should I care? Why should the fact that it plays similar to OD&D interest me? I already HAVE a game that plays like OD&D. "You like cherry pie? This tastes similar to cherry pie!" "But .... I have a cherry pie right here!" If we are going to be trading one line points of philosophy and analogies it is because variety is the spice of life. If somebody else ran it, I'd play it; I'll play d**n near anything. But if I can't play without knowing the rules first, I'm not interested. I stated in other places that 5e is not likely to cause anybody who is happy with their edition of choice to change. The only reason you should care, given that you are satisfied and happy with OD&D, is that because 5e plays similarly to OD&D that it makes it easier for you to join an arbitrary and just play as you always have in OD&D. You said here and in other posts that you play d**n near anything, that you played in games of later editions for various reasons. Well all I am saying that based on my experience with 5e that it is the edition other than OD&D of course, that require the least amount of change for an OD&D player. Yes you will need to learn some new rules but they are about as hard as learning the Ranger from Stategic Review or the Monk from Supplement II. Hell I can summarize everything, except for specific class details, in over a dozen sentences. batintheattic.blogspot.com/2014/08/explaining-5e-in-as-few-words-as-possile.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2014 14:59:44 GMT -6
If somebody I game with wants to run 5E, I'll worry about it then, honestly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2014 20:04:26 GMT -6
I have a lot going on, and my time is scarce. Therefore, I have to have a really overwhelming reason to take on anything new, because it means I'm going to have to drop something. I'm currently running an OD&D game, working on my Kickstarter, working on a workshop on budgeting in a nonprofit context, working, and oh, yeah, building a model railroad.
I'm booked up. Anything new, no matter what it is, has to make a very, very strong case to be worth my time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2014 18:40:49 GMT -6
Okay, so I downloaded the player's guide PDF and looked through it.
Too many rules. It's 100 d**n pages. OD&D was 110 half-sized pages for the entire game.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 10, 2014 19:50:41 GMT -6
Yeah, it is not at all a lite game.
|
|
|
Post by rsdean on Aug 10, 2014 19:50:57 GMT -6
Okay, so I downloaded the player's guide PDF and looked through it. Too many rules. It's 100 d**n pages. OD&D was 110 half-sized pages for the entire game. I had the same reaction. If the player section of the 'basic' rules is that long, I don't really have the energy and time to read it...
|
|
|
Post by archersix on Aug 10, 2014 21:22:13 GMT -6
I've not read the rules, just thumbed through them. I did have the chance to play a game of 5e at a local Con a few weeks ago. I had fun, but to me it didn't really feel like OD&D. It felt kinda like a 'light' version of 3rd Ed.
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Aug 11, 2014 8:24:02 GMT -6
Okay, so I downloaded the player's guide PDF and looked through it. Too many rules. It's 100 d**n pages. OD&D was 110 half-sized pages for the entire game. I had the same reaction. If the player section of the 'basic' rules is that long, I don't really have the energy and time to read it... Me, too. Sure, I'd play it if the opportunity arose, but I'd never run it. Too much work for too little fun; I already know OD&D.
|
|
|
Post by kenmeister on Aug 11, 2014 9:38:13 GMT -6
But you might want so spend an idle afternoon leafing through the Basic PDF to see if it grabs you. I did that, and it didn't grab me. I own the following editions of D&D: OD&D AD&D C&C LotFP Heh, the speed at which you put things up for sale, you won't own very much soon
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 11, 2014 11:54:26 GMT -6
This morning, I was struck by a thought. When I started my AD&D 1e campaign in 2001, the “current” edition was 3.0e. If we had gone with 3e simply out of a desire to be, and remain, “current,” we would have had to switch books four times (3.5e, 4e, Essentials, and now 5e). What a mess of a campaign that would have been! Phew! Who wants to fiddle around with rules so much, anyway? Plus, I don’t feel like I have even scratched the surface in exhausting the possibilities offered by the AD&D 1e game.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Aug 11, 2014 20:38:04 GMT -6
When I started my AD&D 1e campaign in 2001, the “current” edition was 3.0e. If we had gone with 3e simply out of a desire to be, and remain, “current,” we would have had to switch books four times (3.5e, 4e, Essentials, and now 5e). What a mess of a campaign that would have been! Good point.
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Aug 12, 2014 3:20:18 GMT -6
I have to say that one of my favourite things about out-of-print games is that they are out of print. I can easily see what is available for the entire line, decide what I need and want, and build the whole game around that. It's seriously the best thing about, for example, RuneQuest 2 for me (not that it isn't an awsome game in its own right, of course). So, there is something to be said for not being current.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Aug 12, 2014 5:45:39 GMT -6
I have to say that one of my favourite things about out-of-print games is that they are out of print. I can easily see what is available for the entire line, decide what I need and want, and build the whole game around that. A great point. I have the same issue with NFL jerseys, where nothing bothers me more than buying a jersey for a favorite player only to have him get traded. At least if I buy a retired player's jersey he can't change. I can't convince Michael (or anyone else) to try a new edition, but I can relate my own experiences. For my group I am the DM essentially 100% of the time, so if I want to actually play I need to go elsewhere. My local game store runs two games -- 13th Age and 5E. I actually play in both, so I bought rulebooks for both. (I actually started each in pre-publication playtest phase, so have played each for around year and a half already.) Through the process of playing I became more familiar, once I became more familar I decided that I could run the game, once I ran a sample I found my players really liked it. Why do they like it? Because they can do more. They have more hit points. Wizards aren't "one and done" and that is a key factor in their enjoyment of both games. I don't think that any gamereplace OD&D in my heart. Ever. But if I want to play I have to look at games in print. Those are the games that the store supports.
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Aug 12, 2014 7:10:01 GMT -6
I don't think that any gamereplace OD&D in my heart. Ever. But if I want to play I have to look at games in print. OD&D is in print. (Granted, it may be pricier than you want...)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2014 11:12:17 GMT -6
Fin, I play ** LOTS ** of stuff. I'm just way fussier about what I buy.
Just a couple weeks ago I played FATE and Xcrawl/Pathfinder for the first time. I had a lot of fun, but won't be buying either game.
Essentially, if I can't play a game without buying it, I won't play.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2014 15:40:49 GMT -6
Through the process of playing I became more familiar, once I became more familar I decided that I could run the game, once I ran a sample I found my players really liked it. Why do they like it? Because they can do more. They have more hit points. Wizards aren't "one and done" and that is a key factor in their enjoyment of both games. I don't think that any gamereplace OD&D in my heart. Ever. But if I want to play I have to look at games in print. Those are the games that the store supports. This is the thing that annoys me, the claim that players can do more in the newer editions. I don't buy that claim at all. They have more hit points, that is a bogus reason, I can start 1st level players with 50 HPs each if I so desire and add a min of 10 for every level with no upper limit, but how does that make the game better? I already give full hit points for first level and I am not opposed to giving them more if they really thought it was an issue. But lets say I double or triple or quadruple HPs across the board, now does that make the game better? Wizards "one and done" is that really a problem, fine Wizards start with 3 spells instead of one, they all start with a wand they inherited and they can use magic swords. Really anything 5E or anything any other game does I can go it one better and still play OD&D if I want to, but again how does that make the game better other than in a Monty Haul way. If my players all came to me and said, can we play Monty Haul for a while as a change of pace, I could do that. My OD&D can do anything your 5E can do and do it much easier and simpler, if I want to do it. Tell us again why we should buy and use those expensive thick books?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2014 18:30:14 GMT -6
Whereas I play with people who embrace the notion that "Just because I'm a first level magic user who has thrown his spell does not mean I'm useless!"
|
|
|
Post by xerxez on Aug 12, 2014 19:27:35 GMT -6
I am currently playing some sessions of 5e. I have enjoyed it and the mechanics seemed very smooth. What I liked best was the sample characters provided in the starter set...they were on very user friendly character sheet formats and had role playing tips for each specific character as well as personal objectives, motivations and faults. Very good for a beginning group new to RPGs. The artwork was great and the sample adventure was set up beautifully and is very old school.
That said, I've no intention of buying the game. As Gronan states, why?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2014 20:01:19 GMT -6
As a counter point, some of us started with later editions and see no reason to prefer OD&D over them. I can do everything that OD&D does with B/X and it's much more clearly written and organized. I can do everything that OD&D does with AD&D 2E, but with a lot of the rough edges removed. At some point people just have to realize that what game one likes is subjective, not objective.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2014 20:18:45 GMT -6
Yes, it's subjective. However, I go to a forum called "ODD74" NOT because I want to discuss the "latest and greatest."
|
|
18 Spears
BANNED
Yeah ... Spear This Ya' Freak!
Posts: 251
|
Post by 18 Spears on Aug 12, 2014 20:20:31 GMT -6
As a counter point, some of us started with later editions and see no reason to prefer OD&D over them. I can do everything that OD&D does with B/X and it's much more clearly written and organized. I can do everything that OD&D does with AD&D 2E, but with a lot of the rough edges removed. At some point people just have to realize that what game one likes is subjective, not objective. Maybe because this is a forum dedicated to OD&D and we didn't feel we had to over-qualify what we understood to be subjective assessments of the our gaming preferences? Without some guy with a chip on his shoulder about other editions of the game jumping in and making a big deal?
|
|
|
Post by rsdean on Aug 13, 2014 3:47:03 GMT -6
So, getting back to 5e, I see they updated the files yesterday, and added the DMG file. It's basic-ally now up to 176 pages total, with more to come. =8-0
|
|
18 Spears
BANNED
Yeah ... Spear This Ya' Freak!
Posts: 251
|
Post by 18 Spears on Aug 13, 2014 4:16:14 GMT -6
Discussing games on a gaming forum? Fine idea.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Aug 13, 2014 5:15:52 GMT -6
As a counter point, some of us started with later editions and see no reason to prefer OD&D over them. I can do everything that OD&D does with B/X and it's much more clearly written and organized. I can do everything that OD&D does with AD&D 2E, but with a lot of the rough edges removed. At some point people just have to realize that what game one likes is subjective, not objective. This is certainly true. Later editions tend to be better written and clearer with nicer mechanics. Not always, of course, but in general the pattern is that things get better as folks work on them. They also become more complex and wordy. The tricky thing is to determine if the newer streamlined advantage outweighs the older simplicity advantage. For a person who has mastered the old version the answer is probably "no," but for a person who came in later the answer is "maybe" to "yes." That doesn't make either version "better" per se, but certainly different. As you noted, this means that subjectivity comes into play a lot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2014 7:56:49 GMT -6
Whereas I play with people who embrace the notion that "Just because I'm a first level magic user who has thrown his spell does not mean I'm useless!" My point exactly!
|
|
|
Post by keith418 on Aug 13, 2014 11:54:07 GMT -6
Any D&D rules that have skills and feats are just a HUGE turn off for me. I want to play better with the rules I have, than hope that new ones will help.
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Aug 13, 2014 14:38:13 GMT -6
Any D&D rules that have skills and feats are just a HUGE turn off for me. Well, feat is just another name for special ability. For instance, fighting-men have the special ability of attacking normals once per hit die per round. This was just given the name Cleave (I think) and called a feat. The real trouble was that by modularizing them creating a character became a game of finding the optimal build.
|
|