* * * Wizards Community Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : Cashin' in on 30 years? Started at 08-02-04 05:30 PM by skathros Visit at http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=286715 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : skathros Date : 08-02-04 05:30 PM Thread Title : Cashin' in on 30 years? 30 years of D&D!!! Anyone else feel like the game's past is being neglected with all this hype? Shouldnt they at least mention a to hit chart somewhere? THAC0? Elves, Dwarves, and halflings (or better yet hobbits) as classes? All i'm really getting from this "Worldwide D&D Game Day :D&D 30th Anniversary" is a cheap attempt at pimping the latest "kewl" setting from the good folks at WotC. Any other grognards out there feel kinda cheated? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : vader42xx Date : 08-02-04 05:33 PM Been feeling that way about 3e and WotC in general for quite a while, no reason for it to change now. ;) But I don't want to turn this into a flame fest so I'll just give a simple "yep" to your question. :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : skathros Date : 08-02-04 05:51 PM Naw, buddy, forget the "flame-fest", it wasnt about that! I was just a tad surprised that something heralded as "30 years of D&D" doesnt seem to mention anything beyond the 3E/3.5 Years. I've never made it a secret that "I" (as in ME) prefer the older version of the game, but WotC's "30 year fiesta" of D&D without recognition of the game's past feels like a disservice to both the old timers, and the new blood who would like to get a glimps into the hobbies past! I think (and i might be mistaken...but i dont think so) that even those who came into the hobby in the 3E years would be interested in knowing of the games past, both rule-wise and company wise (for good or ill). -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : Incenjucar Date : 08-02-04 06:05 PM Though originally a 2e player, and a primarily 3e player at present, I wouldn't mind seeing some older style things (Indeed, on their survey, I suggested they have an article series on the website that converted older things to 3e, such as the original cosmology with "Entropy" and such, for those who missed it). It should be noted, however, they HAVE had a little 'racial class' thing, just not in the classic manner. Of course, they -have- taken the idea of the dungeon being the center of existance in to play.. to the point where it's starting to ruin some of their products... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : vader42xx Date : 08-02-04 06:49 PM Yeah, I know your post wasn't meant to be a flame fest...that's why I didn't go into more detials. I didn't want to get your thread locked down. ;) My personal feelings for WotC and 3e are nothing but fuel for such a flame so I tend to stay away from conversations like this except to give the "yeah, I feel ripped off" answer. :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-03-04 12:38 AM Thread Title : Re: Cashin' in on 30 years? Originally posted by skathros 30 years of D&D!!! Anyone else feel like the game's past is being neglected with all this hype? I was just a tad surprised that something heralded as "30 years of D&D" doesnt seem to mention anything beyond the 3E/3.5 Years. I think (and i might be mistaken...but i dont think so) that even those who came into the hobby in the 3E years would be interested in knowing of the games past, both rule-wise and company wise (for good or ill). It honestly doesn't surprise me that little attention is given to the past in regards to D&D. Personally I believe that 3.xx edition is precisely an attempt to break away from the past so that WotC can take the game into new directions without having to be burdened with a legacy that, in large part, doesn't include WotC. In other words, to draw too much attention to the history of the game is to draw too much attention to the era inwhich D&D was a TSR product, and not a WotC product. Sure, WotC owns the TSR name and liscences etc. now, however that does not mean that the game as it was known in its pre-WotC incarnations can rightly and properly be called WotC's creation. An important distinction IMHO. Acknowledging the past brings up the question of whether the game as a whole is in fact heading in a positive and consistent direction. The less people know about the older versions of the game, the less likely I think people are going to offer criticism (constructive or otherwise) about where WotC is going with D&D, at least in regards to where the game came from in comparison with what it has become. Now of course that in no way is meant to be taken as some kind of whacko conspiracy theory that WotC is trying to keep the OOP followers and faithful down. There are plenty of sites out there where OOP products are available, both in print and electronic format, for people to purchase them and compare them to 3.xx. As well, I'm sure if someone were really interested in the history of the game, they could dig up sites that detail D&D and its development through the years, both as a hobby and a business. If WotC truly wanted to snuff out any interest in the history of the game, this OOP board wouldn't exist. Still, this board may simply be a bone tossed to the old schoolers in an attempt to get them to think WotC cares about them so that the old schoolers buy 3.xx products. /shrug To me WotC doesn't talk about the *past* of the game much, insofar as it could possibly detract from what they are doing with the game now. I think that this can be seen, for example, in the way inwhich the Greyhawk setting gets so little attention, as it draws people's attention back to the pre-3.xx days since Greyhawk was basically the original setting for D&D's earliest editions. If we look back to Greyhawk, we may look back to the older incarnations of the game, and come to the conclusion that we like the older incarnations better. Essentially what I'm saying is that WotC certainly wants to cash in on the idea of D&D being the *original and oldest* RPG out there, because it would simply be bad business not to trade on the name that they purchased. However, that doesn't mean that they want to draw too much attention to that long history of the game. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : vader42xx Date : 08-03-04 03:04 AM Sure, all of what you said is true. I don't expect them to run around all the time talking about how great the old games were. That doesn't make much sense from a business standpoint. And, what's more, it doesn't make much sense from a gamer standpoint. After all, like it or not, there are loads of 3e players who think the newest edition is great! There are even many who would never have touched D&D (advanced or otherwise) until 3e came out because it's more balanced, polished, better, or whatever else they feel (note; not my feelings). But, all of the above is on a normal everyday basis. How can you have a 30th anniversary celebration of D&D without at least 50% of it being old school in nature? After all, 3e hasn't been around for 30 years. In fact, I'd personally go so far as to say that the game WotC currently calls D&D hasn't been around for 30 years, in any form. But that's my bone to pick I guess. In any case, taking bussines into account, a 30 year celebration should include both the old and the new. If WotC wants to do this right they'll take care of their roots as well as their young buds. :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Author : Halaster-Blackcloak Date : 08-03-04 07:19 AM No big surprise. Anyone who's been around here for any length of time has seen how OOP editions are **** on. No need to get into ugly details...those who have a clue understand what I'm saying. Why would WOTC break tradition now and show some respect for the OOP versions, after all the years of abuse? Three months ago they claimed they were going to heed the suggestions of some of us old timers and create an Edition Conversion forum so that all these "how do I make this into 3E" threads can stop polluting the ONE SINGLE OOP forum here at WOTC. In fact, we started asking for it in February I believe. Three months and no news. Anyone here gullible enough to think I'll be holding my breath? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Author : vader42xx Date : 08-03-04 08:54 AM Oh...we're not supposed to be holding our breath? :OMG! Well aren't I just a... :turkey: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 10] Author : WSmith Date : 08-03-04 09:14 AM Still, this board may simply be a bone tossed to the old schoolers in an attempt to get them to think WotC cares about them so that the old schoolers buy 3.xx products. /shrug Why Gandolf_Istari, shame on you. Don't you know we aren't supposed to mention these types of things on the WotC Boards. We are only supposed to talk about 3rd edition in a positive light, as these boards are a marketing tool for the newest edition. ;) Maybe that is why the edition conversion forum doesn't exist. It doesn't matter though, cause there are other website that handle OOP D&D better by 10 fold than this organization. To address the original question, I am not surprised. D&D is no longer a game created by gamers for gamers to enjoy. It is now created by a marketing team to move widgets. I wouldn't expect anything less. Maybe a reprint of the old pastel modules or the Holmes rulebook? Nah, been done already in the 25th anniv boxed set. To WotC the past is in the past. But, hey they are gonna put out some kewl basic set! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 11] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-03-04 09:55 AM Originally posted by vader42xx Sure, all of what you said is true. I don't expect them to run around all the time talking about how great the old games were. That doesn't make much sense from a business standpoint. And, what's more, it doesn't make much sense from a gamer standpoint. After all, like it or not, there are loads of 3e players who think the newest edition is great! There are even many who would never have touched D&D (advanced or otherwise) until 3e came out because it's more balanced, polished, better, or whatever else they feel (note; not my feelings). But, all of the above is on a normal everyday basis. How can you have a 30th anniversary celebration of D&D without at least 50% of it being old school in nature? After all, 3e hasn't been around for 30 years. In fact, I'd personally go so far as to say that the game WotC currently calls D&D hasn't been around for 30 years, in any form. But that's my bone to pick I guess. In any case, taking bussines into account, a 30 year celebration should include both the old and the new. If WotC wants to do this right they'll take care of their roots as well as their young buds. :) I think we're saying the same thing. :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 12] Author : vader42xx Date : 08-03-04 11:07 AM I know, I just rant more. :rant: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 13] Author : diaglo Date : 08-03-04 12:21 PM i'm running an OD&D (1974) campaign. this weekend we are set for yet another 6 hour session.:D -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 14] Author : havard Date : 08-03-04 12:31 PM I actually think that opposed to 2E, 3e has attempted to incorporate loads of elements from the previous editions of D&D, while at the same time making an effort to bring the system up to date (YMMV on the success of this one). The fact that Monks, Barbarians, Chainmail Miniature Rules, Weapon Mastery (feats), High level Class options (PrCs) are back in D&D, plus a much more open attitude towards retro-style gaming than what ever existed in the 2E years is quite a tribute to gaming history IMO. No Flames please :) Havard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 15] Author : MrkGrismer Date : 08-03-04 03:10 PM I'm not sure what else they can do as a tribute to 1st ed other then convert and republish some of the old module series: The Secret of Salt Marsh (et al) Descent into the Depths Against the Giants Queen of the Demonweb Pits Tomb of Horrors etc... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 16] Author : Elendur Date : 08-03-04 03:25 PM I really don't get this sentiment at all. Are you bothered by the fact they they will be running 3e games on Worldwide Game Day? Both Dragon and Dungeon had retro content in their anniversary issues. The hardbound retrospective book coming out covers the whole history of D&D. GenCon activities include a D&D timeline exhibit, and a special Castle Greyhawk adventure. True Dungeon will be be running Return to Hommlet, based on the 1e module Temple of Elemental Evil. The D&D mini game came out with figures for characters from old 1e modules. I had never imagined new miniatures would be produced for the 20 year old modules I'm currently running. I hate to break it to you folks, but 2004 represents the absolute pinnacle of coverage of out of print products. I'm going to enjoy it while it lasts. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 17] Author : radwizard Date : 08-03-04 03:54 PM Originally posted by vader42xx Been feeling that way about 3e and WotC in general for quite a while, no reason for it to change now. ;) I'll ditto that, :cool: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 18] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-03-04 06:15 PM Originally posted by Elendur I hate to break it to you folks, but 2004 represents the absolute pinnacle of coverage of out of print products. /chuckle :rolleyes: If 2004 is the "absolute pinacle of coverage of out of print products" by WotC, I don't want to think about what the future holds. :( -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 19] Author : skathros Date : 08-03-04 06:59 PM Originally posted by Elendur I really don't get this sentiment at all. Are you bothered by the fact they they will be running 3e games on Worldwide Game Day? Actually, i'm more bothered by the "30 years of D&D" header. Should just call it 7 years of WotC or 3 months of Eberron. The folks can run 3E games t'ill they're blue in the face, but 3E games are not representitive of the totality of D&D's 30 years...it's only the latest chapter. Maybe they could run a 1E game? Or B/X? Maybe not...might just confuse those players playing Dwarven Wizards;) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 20] Author : Varl Date : 08-03-04 09:29 PM 30 years of D&D!!! Yeah, pretty cool, though it's not really 30 years of D&D, it's more like 3.5 years of D&D. ;) :bow: Any other grognards out there feel kinda cheated? A little, but I'll get over it. After all, it's not as painful as what they've done to the game. :tiphat: ;) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 21] Author : Torpedo Date : 08-04-04 01:11 AM Originally posted by havard I actually think that opposed to 2E, 3e has attempted to incorporate loads of elements from the previous editions of D&D, while at the same time making an effort to bring the system up to date (YMMV on the success of this one). The fact that Monks, Barbarians, Chainmail Miniature Rules, Weapon Mastery (feats), High level Class options (PrCs) are back in D&D, plus a much more open attitude towards retro-style gaming than what ever existed in the 2E years is quite a tribute to gaming history IMO. Well said! I've played since 1981. By played I mean Basic, Expert, 1st Edition, 2nd Edition, 3rd Edition, & 3.5. The current version of the game really takes me back to the days of my initial love of the game. But it does it with a better rules set IMO. The latest issue of Dungeon has a great adventure set on the Isle of Dread and they have several pages devoted to a gazetteer for the Isle. This is just one example, but there have been and continue to be lots of references to the history of the game. The only thing the company is not doing is teaching players to play OoP editions. But why would they? That's what self-professed "grognards" and "noble defenders" are for. ;) The game has always changed. It will continue to change. Even within editions the game changed. Expert expanded Basic. Unearthed Arcana changed 1st Edition. Skills & Powers, etc. changed 2nd Edition. D&D has been constantly changing for 30 years. Even individual players change the game with their campaign house rules. I see nothing wrong with WotC celebrating this milestone by enticing new players to the latest version of this everchanging game. More people playing D&D (any version) is a good thing. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 22] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-04-04 01:33 AM Originally posted by Torpedo Well said! I've played since 1981. By played I mean Basic, Expert, 1st Edition, 2nd Edition, 3rd Edition, & 3.5. The current version of the game really takes me back to the days of my initial love of the game. But it does it with a better rules set IMO. The latest issue of Dungeon has a great adventure set on the Isle of Dread and they have several pages devoted to a gazetteer for the Isle. This is just one example, but there have been and continue to be lots of references to the history of the game. The only thing the company is not doing is teaching players to play OoP editions. But why would they? That's what self-professed "grognards" and "noble defenders" are for. ;) The game has always changed. It will continue to change. Even within editions the game changed. Expert expanded Basic. Unearthed Arcana changed 1st Edition. Skills & Powers, etc. changed 2nd Edition. D&D has been constantly changing for 30 years. Even individual players change the game with their campaign house rules. I see nothing wrong with WotC celebrating this milestone by enticing new players to the latest version of this everchanging game. More people playing D&D (any version) is a good thing. Thats it, you've convinced me! I'm dumping all of my OOP stuff, converting to 3rd edition, and investing heavily in Hasbro stock. :turkey: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 23] Author : vader42xx Date : 08-04-04 03:12 AM Come on guys, we all have thoughts on the 3e vs OoP editions but that's not what this thread was about. So let's not turned it into yet another locked flame war hmm? :88E: Some of you guys like 3e better and that's great. We here on the OoP forum don't (hence the title of the forum). We're also aware that the only reason WotC keeps this forum running is in an effort to "bring the editions together" (read: get us to buy new stuff one way or another). As that's not going to happen and every one of us has our favorite edition, why argue about which is "better?" I mean, if I tell you 3e is awful because of X, Y, and Z do you really care? And if you tell me 3e is better because of A, B, and C do you think I really care? So let's stay on topic shall we? :) Regardless of which edition is "best" (which is a very foolish argument to start with) the fact remains that 30 Years of D&D without paying any real attention to the older editions is a sick joke. Run some 1e games, show off some old products (maybe even sell a few), write up an AD&D/3e conversion adventure product, do something! The posts above this one all said it just fine...this really should be called "7 Years of a Game that Wishes it was D&D but it's Not Really so Don't Sweat it." Ok, ok...couldn't help that one. ;) Really, the point is that whatever 3e might be to you it's not anything close to what D&D used to be. It doesn't even have that same all important "feel" which none of us can describe but we all know is missing. And for those who think 3e brought back more of 1e by having assassins and half-orcs you need to look at the ratio of things "brought back" to the things "screwed up." Ok, I think my little rambling :rant: is done with. In conclusion, whatever edition you love, this "30 Years of D&D" is a total joke without at least half of it being dedicated to the OoP editions. If they don't want to do that they shouldn't have an event called "30 Years of D&D." It's just that simple. :D -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 24] Author : havard Date : 08-04-04 11:07 AM I might be partially guilty of moving this thread towards a 3e vs Oe debate, for that I appologize. My point was however, that 3e did from its design carry over many features of previous editions, whether symbolic or actual. Oh and with the 30 years of D&D, Dragon did an article on the history of D&D and the various editions a couple of issues ago :) Håvard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 25] Author : Myrridin Date : 08-04-04 11:40 AM Originally posted by MrkGrismer I'm not sure what else they can do as a tribute to 1st ed other then convert and republish some of the old module series: The Secret of Salt Marsh (et al) Descent into the Depths Against the Giants Queen of the Demonweb Pits Tomb of Horrors etc... I would pay serious money to have conversions of those 1E modules for 3.5. No one I play with is interested in going backwards into older additions of D&D due to bad experiences. That's fine with me, but I played through those modules in the mid-80's, and would love to run people through them now. I'll take them in any rules set I can get that I have people to run them in! :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 26] Author : MrkGrismer Date : 08-04-04 11:45 AM Originally posted by Myrridin I would pay serious money to have conversions of those 1E modules for 3.5. No one I play with is interested in going backwards into older additions of D&D due to bad experiences. That's fine with me, but I played through those modules in the mid-80's, and would love to run people through them now. I'll take them in any rules set I can get that I have people to run them in! :) They were some good modules. Probably wouldn't be that difficult to convert, but I think I loaned mine out never to be seen again. :( -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 27] Author : GreyLord Date : 08-04-04 11:58 AM The game has always changed. It will continue to change. Even within editions the game changed. Expert expanded Basic. Unearthed Arcana changed 1st Edition. Skills & Powers, etc. changed 2nd Edition. D&D has been constantly changing for 30 years. Even individual players change the game with their campaign house rules. I see nothing wrong with WotC celebrating this milestone by enticing new players to the latest version of this everchanging game. More people playing D&D (any version) is a good thing. Expert expanded Basic? That's news to me...and Here I was thinking the rules of D&D was around long before that Basic set... ;) Skills and Powers didn't change 2nd edition (It was optional if I remember), I didn't prefer to use any of those Optional books overall. I did use UA in 1e, still do, and when doing 2e prefer to grandfather clause 1e rules in... I see a LOT of problems celebrating a milestone without referencing to older editions. I have no problem with them enticing new players to the latest edition, but one begins to wonder why they wouldn't reference to older editions. Perhaps it's like the US celebrating it's 200th bicentenial without showing what George Washington actually did, or what Abraham Lincoln's actual Addresses and comments were, or celebrating the 200th bicentennial of the Constitution without actually showing what they wrote then and the events there, but instead claiming that the current US constitution is exactly how it was when it was first written. Of course they didn't do that. They wouldn't be celebrating the lengthy existence of the Constitution if they did that. The goal is to show how the items have changed (typically for the better) in any celebration as well as the length of time those items have been around. It shows the durability of the original idea, and the improvements that have been made whilst sticking to the original idea. Of course when one ignores it's past in certain items it indicates that they are either ashamed or their past ideas, that those ideas did NOT endure, OR that the ideas currently didn't actually come from those original ideas. Either that or they consider those ideas so insignificant as to not even deserve mention. Which could it be with the current D&D???? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 28] Author : havard Date : 08-04-04 12:39 PM I don't get this. What exactly would you have Wizards do? And concerning the idea of being ashamed of previous versions or ideas from older variants of the game, I think that was much more a case in the 2e era than now. 3e is a weird combination of a moder modern form of rpg than the older versions (streamlined, has a skill system internally logical, one die mechanic etc) and a retro style type of game (miniatures, dungeon crawl oriented, lots of kewl powerz). If there is something Wizards these days is not about, I think it is about being ashamed about its past. 2e was much more a move away from the OE rules. Dungeon Crawling was scorned upon (at least in the latter years, a spillover from White Wolf probably), and all the kewl powerz were removed, aswell as fun player options like half-orcs and monks. Again, this is not about which version is better. Im just saying, at least from the actual 3e game I sense no desire from Wizards to hide their past. Products like Chainmail and the upcoming D&D basic also do not indicate such a trend. That said, WotC is about making money, what company isn't? I am sure that they want to take advantage of the anniversary to plug their current products to the fullest, but whats wrong about that? Just me, sticking my head out :) Håvard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 29] Author : Elendur Date : 08-04-04 03:48 PM Originally posted by GreyLord I see a LOT of problems celebrating a milestone without referencing to older editions. I have no problem with them enticing new players to the latest edition, but one begins to wonder why they wouldn't reference to older editions. I would too, but that's not what happening. The book entitled "30 years of adventure" covers all 30 years of D&D. So do the events at GenCon. So did the Dragon and Dungeon issues. So stop saying Wizards is ignoring the past in its 30th anniversary activities. It's not true. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 30] Author : q'afuu Date : 08-04-04 04:20 PM Originally posted by MrkGrismer Against the Giants I'm actually working on that. I'll probably put it up on my website for downloading, but time constraints over the next couple of months might mean this will be a long-term project... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 31] Author : skathros Date : 08-04-04 05:25 PM Originally posted by Elendur So do the events at GenCon. like...? I'm out of the loop when it comes to cons (we dont have any here in Montreal), so maybe i missed WotC's embrace of all the editions and incarnations of D&D from the last 30 years! From what i've seen so far, it just seems like they're useing it as a big old advert for 3.5 and Eberron (sp?)...of yeah, and there's the cleverly named new basic set...but i wont go there, that's a whole other can of worms! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 32] Author : skathros Date : 08-04-04 05:36 PM doubble post...sorry. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 33] Author : roll8dn Date : 08-04-04 06:50 PM I am (relatively) new to DND. I have played (what I believe are) five different editions: the old pink box (I think it was 1e Basic DND, but I could be wrong), Advanced DND (the blue book), and 2e Basic DND (the black box with a red dragon on the front), as well as 3.0 and 3.5. I have not played any of them for very long (not even 3.x, due to my newness to it) because of a chronic lack of players. I have, however, enjoyed all of these editions. Without getting into an argument as to which edition is "best", I can see why WotC would make a "30-year Anniversary" and only mention their latest products: money. I would do the same thing, from a business standpoint; it makes sense to get the "latest and greatest" thing advertised. This doesn't mean, however, that I would not try to pull in all of the potential customers that I could. Therefore, I have no idea why Wizards is not making conversions of the older modules and/or running games in older editions. Just makes no sense to me. Anyways, that's just my two cents... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 34] Author : vader42xx Date : 08-05-04 02:54 AM You answered your own question actually. They don't do conversions for money. They're not big in drawing attention to the existance of older editions at all. This OoP forum (which is nothing more than an attempt to draw old gamers into the 3e fold, note that we still don't have our conversion forum) and the very few left over archives that can be downloaded from the D&D site are the only mentions of older editions that WotC makes. And the archives have been all but stripped so they're just about worthless. And before anybody goes and mentiones Dragon (or Dungeon) again, let's get one thing straight. WotC doesn't print Dragon anymore...Paizo does. So they make the calls on what articles to run and what not to. So, yes, they are doing a slightly better job admitting the existance of older editions but that doesn't give any credit to WotC. As to "what would I have WotC do," I'd have them a) not run a "30 Years of D&D" at all since it's a slap in the face...or b) Actually include something from all "30 Years of D&D." It's really odd that so many don't expect a product to give what it advertises. If you say "30 Years of D&D" then you need to include ALL 30 years, not just the recent ones that make you the most money. Otherwise, don't push through some half-baked marketing idea just for a buck. And, I'm sorry, but that's exactly what WotC is doing in my eyes, no debate to it for me. :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 35] Author : diaglo Date : 08-05-04 09:32 AM Originally posted by havard I don't get this. What exactly would you have Wizards do? 1) print material for the older editions of the game. 2) give people an area to legal discuss and trade ideas for those products. 3) convert the newer editions back to real D&D. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 36] Author : WSmith Date : 08-05-04 09:37 AM Originally posted by Elendur I would too, but that's not what happening. The book entitled "30 years of adventure" covers all 30 years of D&D. So do the events at GenCon. So did the Dragon and Dungeon issues. So stop saying Wizards is ignoring the past in its 30th anniversary activities. It's not true. First of all, that Dragon issue was barely even a teaser. It was more like a single "picture" of each decade of D&D. (Not to mention some of the info was borderline incorrect, but that is not the point). A tribute, it is not. It was pretty appaling IMO. Next, has anyone actually seen this book of the "30 years..." yet? Well I sure haven't. However, I am not going to hold my breath and wait for a lot of "truth" about the older editions in this manuscript. I will wait before commenting on it any further, cause they many actually do something good with this. We will see. Finally, who are you to tell us to stop saying anything? It is my eduacated opinion from the product line and marketing techniques that Wizards of the Coast have been employing that there is not and there never will be a genuine interest in an honest tribute to the roots of the best role playing game ever. So don't tell me what I can and cannot say. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 37] Author : diaglo Date : 08-05-04 11:00 AM Originally posted by Elendur So stop saying Wizards is ignoring the past in its 30th anniversary activities. It's not true. i'll just say i agree with WSmith. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 38] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-05-04 01:29 PM Originally posted by diaglo 1) print material for the older editions of the game. 2) give people an area to legal discuss and trade ideas for those products. 3) convert the newer editions back to real D&D. I'll add a couple to these. 4) Take care of whatever the problem was that stopped the scanning and release of OOP products as purchasable electronic format downloads. There are numerous OOP products that are unavailable as purchasable electronic downloads that it would be great to see released so that people can round out there PDF collections of OOP products from different editions of D&D as well as other games. 5) Tell svgames and rpgnow to stop selling the OOP stuff that WotC offers for free on their site. To me its pretty greedy for svgames and rpgnow to sell pdf's of stuff that is offered for free in the archives here http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/downloads on WotC's site. Make svgames and rpgnow put links to the free stuff on their sites as well, since it seems rather ridiculous to me that these sites are trying to sell stuff that WotC offers up for free. 6) Create a periodical similar to Dragon (or let someone else do it) that deals exclusively with OOP editions of the game. 7) Sell the rights to OOP stuff to someone who is willing to print new stuff for those systems. :D 8) Scrap 3.xx and go back to the real game. :smirk: :invasion: OK so those last two (7 & 8) will never happen. But hey I can dare to dream... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 39] Author : Strephon Alkhalikoi Date : 08-05-04 02:21 PM Thread Title : 3.5 Years of Crap Originally posted by diaglo 1) print material for the older editions of the game. 2) give people an area to legal discuss and trade ideas for those products. 3) convert the newer editions back to real D&D. diaglo, all I have to say is "Amen". I tend to ignore these forums in total simply because there's nothing but utter tripe posted on them 99% of the time. I've already made a relevant post on this topic on another board outside of here that handles older editions of the game far better than this company can ever hope to do, and really need not repeat it here. I seem to forget though that this board only exists for marketing purposes, not for any real altruistic goal like actually supporting older editions of the game. :rolleyes: WotC has absolutely no inclination nor any desire to cure the rift that they created in the production of the monstrosity that is d20 Fantasy. The OOP forum merely serves as a half-hearted attempt to force those who populate it to conform to the status quo. Unfortunately the status quo has been corrupted by not having the right people manning the helm. For if the right people were manning the helm, the status quo would not have brought about this abomination that is d20 Fantasy. WotC just does not care that they have made the wrong choices in the handling of this game. WotC only cares about the gamers in as much as they can suck money out of the gamer's wallets. With WotC and Hasbro, it's all about greed. Who gives a damn about the quality of the product. Just put it out there. It has a recognized name on it so it will sell! Just because it sells well doesn't necessarily mean that it's any good. d20 Fantasy is living proof of that. Yes, this game is barely a line item on Hasbro's P&L statement, but how am I supposed to bring myself to buy any of their board games if they can't show that quality matters on an item that is little more than a line item on the P&L? This company, by its dreadful mismanagement, its incompetent R&D people, and it's abysmally awful marketing analysts, has missed the boat. The presence of message boards still out there promoting Dungeons & Dragons instead of d20 Fantasy should tell people something: that Dungeons & Dragons stuff is still wanted! Of course, the plea falls upon deaf ears because Hasbro is committed to staying the course and dealing with the monstrosity they have created. So unfortunately, no new material for Dungeons & Dragons will be created. d20 Fantasy material though will be everpresent, at least until 4th edition upgrade comes out. It used to be that games were made by gamers for gamers. And it used to be that people could freely discuss changes made to the game and pass along those changes to whomever they choose. With our wonderful friends at Hasbro this really isn't the case any longer. Sure, you have this forum for Dungeons & Dragons discussion, but you can't really discuss anything in it without d20 Fantasy extremists putting in their two cents worth on how their game is supposedly better than Dungeons & Dragons. It pisses me off even more when I see something along the lines of "my game is better, and you should change your opinion to match mine because..." on any message board. Look, constructive criticism is fine. Stating that d20 Fantasy is better than Dungeons & Dragons and saying why is fine. Dungeons & Dragons players may not like the reasons, but as long as it doesn't degenerate into "change your mind to match mine, or else", it's all good. Take a look at me. In this very post you can tell my opinion on the game by how I describe it. I have very good reasons as to why I do not like the game as it stands now. Other than shown here, I have a very neutral reaction in regards to the d20 System as a whole. I find it works fine for science fiction, perhaps because of its Alternity antecedents. It's not good for fantasy, and should stay out of that arena. diaglo, as noted above, believes that the game should be converted back to real Dungeons & Dragons. I do agree with him, to a point. I don't know his mindset, but I do know his preferences, and know that to him OD&D is the only true game. I interpreted his statement as meaning that OD&D should go back into print. I do think that for a 30th anniversary celebration, a boxed set of OD&D with the four supplements printed up for sale would be the perfect thing. There is one small thing that should be included in the box. A booklet on making d20 Fantasy compatible with OD&D! Think about it. Right now there's a conversion document to go from Dungeons & Dragons to d20 Fantasy. Why is that conversion only one way? Well the reason is to try to force people to play only the "one game to rule them all", but it would be nice for an "official" booklet on using d20 Fantasy supplements in Dungeons & Dragons to be released. After all, the "one game to rule them all" idea of the original release of d20 Fantasy has not been nearly as successful as Hasbro hoped. With the exception of GDW, all the major players in the industry in the late 70's and early 80's are still in business, though with reduced profit margins. Right now, the only serious challenge to Hasbro is White Wolf. Pretty much everyone else is a bit player now, but in spite of that the bit players continue to press forward, making games with mechanics as different from d20 Fantasy as possible. I for one appreciate that diversity, because I like to have alternatives and not be shoehorned into using one particular game system, which is what Hasbro wants. The d20 Fantasy extremists might not appreciate the idea of diversity, but they have their game to play, even if it is demonstrably worse than what the bit players put out. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 40] Author : skathros Date : 08-05-04 04:49 PM Originally posted by Gandalf_Istari 7) Sell the rights to OOP stuff to someone who is willing to print new stuff for those systems. :D Now this would get my money! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 41] Author : skathros Date : 08-05-04 05:18 PM http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=285421 Oh quit being a curmudegon. WOTC has at least done some symbolic things. They've aknowledged both Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson on their books. The let Gary write ro The Dragon. They used Greyhawk as the core setting. They have allowed out of print old items to be downloaded for free. Seems to me like they used the Greyhawk stuff as filler for their Rulebooks, a few mentions here and there, and then "pooffff"...on to FR3E! Nothing more than a bone, devoide of meat, thrown to appease the grognards who might grumble. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 42] Author : Elendur Date : 08-05-04 06:49 PM Vader42xx keeps persisting in saying things that aren't based on fact. That's all I'm trying to get straight. Vader has said there is this 'thing' called '30 years of D&D' which doesn't include the past editions. But this thing doesn't exist. The Worldwide D&D Game day is named just that. It doesn't make any claims to cover all 30 years of D&D games. There is a hardbound book called 'Thirty Years of Adventure: A Celebration of Dungeons & Dragons' coming out, and according to its product list it will indeed cover the whole 30 year history. Other 30th anniversary activities and products: A set of dice with dice bag embroidered with the 30th Anniversary logo. I'm pretty sure these will work for any edition, though you'll have an extra 6-sider and a funny looking 10-sider Special Edition Players Handbook - Leather bound version of the 3.5 player's handbook. Right up there with the Necronomicon and the Book of Vile Darkness in terms of pure evil. Gen Con Events - Epic Level D&D Party on Thursday night D&D Timeline Exhibit - If this timeline starts in 2000 I'll be really angry. D&D Open: Shards of Eberron - I don't really see how this is anniversary related. I think they just call all of their Gen Con events 30th anniversary. RPGA Delve: Castle Greyhawk. Woohoo! At this point I consider Greyhawk OOP so I'm glad to see any new content. RPGA Delve: Undermountain - Don't know much about this since its Forgotten Realms, but I think Undermountain was a 2e product. Living City Finale - Closing of a campaign started in the 2e days. D&D Miniatures Championship - Again not really related. "Stump the Designer" Q&A. Maybe this would be the chance to ask Monte, Skip, and Johnathan "why did you ruin D&D?" Of course none of those guys work for WotC anymore so I don't know whose going to be there. Having Dave and Gary there seems highly unlikely, but anything possible. There you have it, all of Wizards official activities related to the 30th anniversary of D&D. Cashing in? Absolutely. Ignoring the past? I respectfully disagree. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 43] Author : MrkGrismer Date : 08-05-04 07:14 PM Am I to assume that some of you believe that OD&D is the only true D&D? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 44] Author : Halaster-Blackcloak Date : 08-05-04 07:52 PM Elendur wrote: RPGA Delve: Castle Greyhawk. Woohoo! At this point I consider Greyhawk OOP so I'm glad to see any new content. RPGA Delve: Undermountain - Don't know much about this since its Forgotten Realms, but I think Undermountain was a 2e product. If they use 3E rules to play these things, then it's not OOP or D&D, it's 3E/d20 gaming. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 45] Author : Halaster-Blackcloak Date : 08-05-04 08:01 PM MrkGrismer wrote: Am I to assume that some of you believe that OD&D is the only true D&D? You won't get a disargeement from Diaglo on that one! :smirk: As far as I'm concerned, all OOP versions are true D&D (except for the Players Options crap), but 3E/d20 is unrelated to true D&D except in name. Going by the feel of the game as promoted by the very rulesets themselves, OOP versions all emphasized roleplaying, whereas 3E emphasized powergaming. 3E/d20 was created to cater to powergaming and videogaming mentality, as evidenced by the glut of mix-and-match choices, utter lack of restrictions, overabundance of "feats" and "prestige classes" (which seem to multiply like weeds), and things such as the Epic level handbook. The game reeks of min/maxing mentality and video game maneuvers (ie feats). The way I see it, WOTC took the name of D&D and some basic core concepts, corrupted the very essense of the game, and turned it into a perverted, emasculated imitation of the original, true game. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 46] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-05-04 08:28 PM Halaster, You never replied to my PM from a couple threads back. Did you not get it again? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 47] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-05-04 08:32 PM Originally posted by MrkGrismer Am I to assume that some of you believe that OD&D is the only true D&D? Why is it that my spidey sense is tingling, telling me that the latest round of OOP vs. 3e flame fests is incoming soon? :fight!: (Hint: this is the OOP board. This is where people who play [and probably prefer] the OOP editions of the game post. You might want to think about that before posting such a question. /wink wink) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 48] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-05-04 08:38 PM Originally posted by Elendur A set of dice with dice bag embroidered with the 30th Anniversary logo. I'm pretty sure these will work for any edition, though you'll have an extra 6-sider and a funny looking 10-sider Yahoo! Finally WotC releases a new product for OOP! I knew they wouldn't marginalize the old schoolers forever... :rolleyes: Err, umm, yeah. :censored: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 49] Author : Halaster-Blackcloak Date : 08-05-04 08:55 PM Havard wrote: Just me, sticking my head out Don't blame my scythe for the tempting target...:smirk: And concerning the idea of being ashamed of previous versions or ideas from older variants of the game, I think that was much more a case in the 2e era than now. Can't agree with that at all. I never saw anything in 2E that seemed to indicate shame or embarrassment over 1E or OD&D. 2E did streamline some stuff but it never referred to older editions as outdated or somehow inferior as 3E stuff does, and 3E "promoters" do in general. In the 2E days, I recall some very powerful respect for older editions, there was never this "the newest edition is where gaming is going, you OOP dinosaurs are out of date" attitude I see now with 3E. a retro style type of game (miniatures, dungeon crawl oriented, lots of kewl powerz) I hate to burst your bubble, but OOP gaming was NEVER about "kewl powerz". That crap came into being with 3E. If you look at 1E or 2E, they had "proficiencies", not "feats". Proficiencies were things like "I can swim" or "I can ride a horse" or "I can forge a sword". Feats in 3E contain ridiculous things such as Great Cleave, Vorpal Attack ("cut your opponent's head off with a beer mug!"), Swim Up A Waterfall, Pass Through A Wall of Force (Escape Artist), etc. So 3E is where we see these ridiculous powergame oriented "kewl powerz". :rolleyes: The very words used...proficiencies vs feats...that right there gives you a clue as to the mentality behind it. As someone else summed up so perfectly, OOP D&D was about what the characters are, 3E is about what the characters can do. And before some 3E defender brings up the 2E Players Options (which of course someone will), I will remind them that the PO crap was OPTIONAL, not part of the CORE rules as the feats are in 3E. 2e was much more a move away from the OE rules Again, can't agree there at all. AD&D was a natural evolution of D&D, much like the Silver Age of comic books was a natural evolution or maturation of the Golden Age. In other words, AD&D was what D&D was destined to become. Its final state. It kept the same general attitudes and rules. 3E changed all that by decimating the class system and most of the restrictions used up to that point (which changed the very flavor of the game), it emasculated the game by removing any and all negative side effects or risks from the casting of any and all spells, and it destroyed the idea of final mortality by removing the concept of CON limits on resurrections, by removing system shock rolls, by removing artificial aging, and by removing the essential resurrection survival roll. And of course, there's the ridiculously overpowered "Greater Resurrection" spell, which negates the need for even a tiny piece of body part in order to resurrect the dead. I refer to all this as "coddling". 3E has a very different feel than any of the previous editions. Dungeon Crawling was scorned upon Again, can't agree here either. It is true that adventures evolved as well, becoming more detailed and expanding beyond the simple and seemingly random dungeon designs of the tournament modules of 1E. And adventures did start to contain more detailed background material. However, the fact that Ruins of Undermountain (and the associated 2nd box set and 3 modules), the Ruins of Zhentil Keep, the Ruins of Myth Drannor, City of Skulls, Labyrinth of Madness, Temple Tower and Tomb, Return to the Tomb of Horrors, Baba Yaga's Hut, and other dungeon crawl adventures were well done and successful indicate that dungeon crawls were still respected in 2E. all the kewl powerz were removed, as well as fun player options like half-orcs and monks True, some options were removed, more due to political reasons to appease a small but rabid and loud minority of religious fanatics who knew nothing about the actual game while insisting that Satan was running it. :rolleyes: But what "kewl powerz" were removed? Rangers still did the same stuff, although they took away the (illogical) use of wizard spells for them. That was a good thing. Wizards still cast the same spells. Druids got the same powers. Thieves got better control over all the same powers. Paladins as well. What's missing? Im just saying, at least from the actual 3e game I sense no desire from Wizards to hide their past. So why are they ****ing on the OOP forum, why did they stop the ESD program for obtaining OOP material, why do they refuse to sell off the rights to AD&D if they have no use for it? And it's not so much a matter of "hiding" their past as it is a matter of utter disrespect for the (superior) company that started it all in the first place, and the people who still endorse the old ways. I am sure that they want to take advantage of the anniversary to plug their current products to the fullest, but whats wrong about that? Nothing, as long as they promote the OOP stuff and give it its proper respect, which of course they are not doing. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 50] Author : Halaster-Blackcloak Date : 08-05-04 08:58 PM Gandalf_Istari wrote: You never replied to my PM from a couple threads back. Did you not get it again? Just peeked...got it! :) I haven't signed in since then, until today. :cool: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 51] Author : WizO_Catoblepas Date : 08-05-04 09:50 PM All right, I hope that everyone has vented enough because it's going to end now. I'm closing this thread since this are the types of threads that get boards closed. Don't start this type of thread again. Look, it is within the guest's powers on this board whether we have a place to discuss Out of Print material on the WotC boards or not. If all this board becomes is one large gripefest about what has happened with the OoP editions, there's very little motivation to keep this board. WotC management will figure this out and just decide the nix the OoP board altogether. However, if this board remains a place to discuss the rules and concepts of older editions, then there may be a future for this board. The WizOs have already tried to get a conversion board and the powers that be said "no". Yeah, that's right, it's not coming. Thus, it isn't like this board is guaranteed to stay forever no matter what the guests do. Thus, if you like this board, let's just stay with dicussing rules and concepts of out of print editions. Personally, I love this board. I've been playing since 1980 and probably know the 1st edition rules better than the 3rd edition rules. I still want a place to go to if I want to discuss out of print editions. The ball is in your court. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from Wizards Community (http://forums.gleemax.com) at 05-10-08 08:19 AM.