OD&D 4E and its effect on 1E/OD&D

[Piratecat]

you should have stopped there. it makes the most sense for you.

Snide and insulting comments are what make your moderators very very cranky. Please refrain from making them in the future.

Don't be rude to one another, please, folks.

 

[Tewligan]

Higher Dex wins. Simple. And by the 1e RAW, that is NOT how speed factors work, by the way.

Hm - maybe I'm misremembering, but I thought that weapon speeds DO, in fact, serve to break initiative ties. If not, how do they work by the RAW?

 

[Michael_R_Proteau]

I can see a few thought processes that could lead disgruntled 3.x players to alternative systems. One is based on the desire of some to play in a supported system, the other to not support a company they are not happy with.

If 4E is not to their liking, and someone wishes to play a game that is supported by current products, they may look around at what else is out there. C&C, Grim Tales, True 20, GURPs etc. could see an increase of customers looking for an alternative to 4E that has new product being produced for it. I don't so much see that leading people to out of print editions though.

Others may not be happy with 4E, and as a result not be happy with WoTC. They may look around and see well who else is making something that does what I need it to do. They too may look at products form other comapnies that provide a rulesset to use to continue their gaming to step away from WotC products. An analogy may be the reaction of some to Microsoft with Vista's release. I don't want to upgrade, I don't like Vista, so who else is making operating systems I can use to get my computer to do what I want it to do. I suppose this could lead some to out of print systems, but again, I think current alernaive systems from other publishers would be the ones to gain if this occured.

I do not see either movement as being very large, but I do think there could be some traction in those directions. I do think the majority of those currently playing 3.x who do not switch to 4E will continue to play 3.x. I also think 4E may attract some new players not currently playing the current edition of D&D or any edition of D&D. The ultimate goal fo a cmpany releasing a product like this is not just short term profits, but expandig the customer base to grow the market. Wheter WotC wil succeed in that with the 4E endeavor, only time will tell.

Again, not sure how significant either thought process would be, but I did overhear a lot of reactions in Indy along the lines of "I will never buy a WotC product again" and a lo of people lookng for alternative systems throughout the dealer room. I am sure a lot o fit was just initial frustration and emotonal outburts running high, but I can see some of that sentiment translating to a small bump to the customer bases of comapnies like TLG, Green Ronin, etc.

-M

 

[ruleslawyer]

Hm - maybe I'm misremembering, but I thought that weapon speeds DO, in fact, serve to break initiative ties. If not, how do they work by the RAW?

They do, but they also have other (more complex) effects in combat by the RAW (specifically, like spell casting times, they determine to the segment in which you act). We abandoned them when someone came up with a (IMHO excellent) new method in Dragon 73 (IIRC).

 

[SavageRobby]

To the OPs question. While I love alternate (Savage Worlds, C&C) and older (AD&D 1e) games, I just don't see people that like 3x switching to older versions because of the advent of 4x. I see them a) staying with 3x, b) switching to 4x or c) some combination.

For the most part, I see people that are dissatisfied (for whatever reason) with 3x switch to other systems, especially older D&D editions.

 

[ruleslawyer]

I'd have to agree. If anything, the things people appear to like about older editions (getting up and running faster, more DM calls rather than codified rules, nostalgia, etc.) are likely to have already weeded them out of 3.x, and 4e is arguably going in the rules-lighter direction, which would seem to alleviate, rather than exacerbate, most old-skoolers' issues with 3e. That said, it's probably best to hear directly from the old-skoolers on this one...

 

[Reynard]

I'd have to agree. If anything, the things people appear to like about older editions (getting up and running faster, more DM calls rather than codified rules, nostalgia, etc.) are likely to have already weeded them out of 3.x, and 4e is arguably going in the rules-lighter direction, which would seem to alleviate, rather than exacerbate, most old-skoolers' issues with 3e. That said, it's probably best to hear directly from the old-skoolers on this one...

Well, the 4e announcement and details that followed finally pushed me over the edge to switching my weekly group to 1e (my monthly group will remain 3e, mostly because there's ain't a snowball's chance of them changing). I happen to play weekly with what is largely a group of grognards -- if you can call people in their mid-30s grognards -- so it wasn't a hard sell.

For me, the issues go far beyond just the perponderance of rules or the powergaming or the amount of just plain work it is to run 3e. It is all of those, plus tone. The fact is, I just prefer the tone and inherent playstyle of earlier editions, and since it looks like 4e is just going to be 3e with all the wrong dials turned up to 11, I feel I can finally give up the ghost on wishing D&D is what it used to be and just play those games instead. I don't wish any ill will to WotC or 4e, and I don't think little of people that want that, but to me everything that has been said about 4e up to this point is pretty much the opposite of what D&D means to me. Magic items in the PHB, a dungeon design column that talked only about combat, per-encounter resources: all of it is anathema to the "good old days".

So yeah, for at least one person, 4e has reignited 1e.

 

[RFisher]

I never understood the need of earlier versions players to constantly try to sell the earlier versions to the current version players.

When you're excited about something, you like to share it, because it's natural to (unconsciously) assume that other people will be excited about it too.

I do my best to avoid that, but I bet I fail a lot.

The big reason I keep coming back here is for the insights I get from discussing our experiences. There is such a diversion of experience represented here that I've never found face-to-face. So, I share my experiences as a part of those discussions. No doubt when doing so I can be misinterpreted as trying to sell something.

And when someone makes a comment about a game I play that conflict with my experience of that game, I'm likely to pipe up & point it out. Again, I do my best to avoid selling, but no doubt I fail sometimes.

AD&D was/is not a simple game system, by any stretch of the imagination.

Agreed!

(Except for the fact that I reckon a majority of "AD&D" players were really playing classic D&D with an AD&D veneer. I know that was mostly the case for my groups when I played AD&D.)

 

[Valiant]

Hobo, please chill out. No reason to be so angry. Its just a game for goodness sakes.

Thats nice that you like customization, I do too (3.5 is great for this). But 3.5 and 1E are different games. Just because you ONLY like customization, and wouldn't consider archetypes, doesn't mean other 3.5ers wouldn't (esp. those that haven't been to this board (the vast majority of 3E players) and aren't so jaded from past conflict. Remeber alot of 3Eers have never tried 1E. Personally I think alot of 3.5 players would love to read 1E if they had the books, and many would like to meet Gygax in person and game with him. You (and few others) I think are the exception.

Also, just because I acknowledge my thoughts "might" be wishful thinking, doesn't mean I'm sure that they are. I could see people wanting to check out the roots of the game, sure (just as they check out the roots of Rock when there mostly into modern rock). Hobo, please remember, ENworld comprises only a very small portion of the entire 3E and 3.5 population, and thus does not represent the typical 3E gamer. Do you understand this?
The typical 3.5 player is younger then most here, and wasn't even born when 1E went out of existance; and they very likely have never seen the 1E books (let alone seeing it played the way it was meant to be). So to them, 1E would be something new.

Anyhow the reason I posted this thread here under a 1E heading was to discourage people not interested (supportive) in 1E from reading it (for their own mental sanity). Please, if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything. I really don't enjoy defending myself from your personal jibes, save them for someone else into that kind of thing.

 

[Valiant]

I'd have to agree. If anything, the things people appear to like about older editions (getting up and running faster, more DM calls rather than codified rules, nostalgia, etc.) are likely to have already weeded them out of 3.x, and 4e is arguably going in the rules-lighter direction, which would seem to alleviate, rather than exacerbate, most old-skoolers' issues with 3e. That said, it's probably best to hear directly from the old-skoolers on this one...

Not if they haven't seen (or possibly heard) of 1E. There's no telling how they might react to an empowered DM and speed increase.