Quote from: estar;503462Yes, true. But what the objective here? If you are try to win over the Original Book crowd then you will fail.

The best attempt at doing something that felt like AD&D was Castles & Crusades. Discontented AD&D fans went off to do OSRIC rather than support C&C. This is despite C&C's ability to use original AD&D modules as is. They wanted to play with the exact rules of a particular edition.

So who are they trying to win back, then?

If 5e is just WotC's version of C&C (an OGL version of the basics with some changes and the ability to do modular add-ons), who is the market?

Quote from: jgants;503486So who are they trying to win back, then?

If 5e is just WotC's version of C&C (an OGL version of the basics with some changes and the ability to do modular add-ons), who is the market?

Presumably they are trying to kill Pathfinder?

Quote from: jgants;503486So who are they trying to win back, then?

If 5e is just WotC's version of C&C (an OGL version of the basics with some changes and the ability to do modular add-ons), who is the market?

My guess their goal is to lure back as customers as many as of the D&D fans as they can.  

Because the fanbase is fractured over various editions of varying complexity I am presuming they designing a multi-prong approach. A ruleset that has options to scale it's complexity i.e. a modular design. Not the only one they could take but one possible solution.

I had to bet now I would say in it's most basic form D&D 5e will look superficially like Castle & Crusades. I say superficially because they would have designed the numbers so that the detailed options will dovetail with the stuff in the basic version.

I.e. you can play a basic fighter that does A at 1st, B at 3rd, C at 5th, etc. Or a advanced fighter that allows you pick to pick what goes into A,B, and C.

When the first wave of retro-clones was cresting some folks had serious talks about making a ur-D&D where you start with classes and walk through the options and out pops out your own version of D&D. My sense was that it could be done but it was a lot of work.

Also that a ur-D&D document wouldn't have much benefit over having the word docs of various retro-clone out in front of you while you cut and paste up your own D&D.  

Finally there a sense that for each major section of the rules there are several well known variants that people pick from when writing their own retro-clone.

For example imagine a 3e or 4e that had race as class as an option. There would be a chapter similar to the prestige class chapter. In that chapter a elf class, a dwarf class, and a halfling class would be detailed. So people who like race as class have something already made for them. And there is a paragraph saying the game will work with restricting demi-humans to their racial class, or it will work with the demi-humans freely picking any class as humans do.  And give some reason why the referee might want to use one approach over the other in their campaign.

I realize that some of the major D&D variants are more problematic to resolve than others. The bet Wizards is making is that they can get close enough to be accepted by a critical mass of gamers to allow the network effect to kick in.

The big problem I see is organized play. Wizards setup a theme for organized play, a theme for their published adventures and people consider that THE way to play D&D 5th. That was the biggest downfall of 4e in my opinion.

QuoteThe best attempt at doing something that felt like AD&D was Castles & Crusades. Discontented AD&D fans went off to do OSRIC rather than support C&C. This is despite C&C's ability to use original AD&D modules as is. They wanted to play with the exact rules of a particular edition.

This is indeed too laughable because OSCRAP was re-written with rule changes and modifications because the plagerizers wanted their own house rules added to it.  Not only that, the OSCRAP crowd despised C&C so much that both TLG and K&KA waged a war against one another with each being forbidden to say each other's product at their respective elitst forums.  

Can you say Cowboys & Indians???

Yes, the D&D player base is incredibly fractured.  Fragmented.  But if WotC gets all of those pieces in one box, what's the harm?

The vibe I'm getting from 4vengers is one of fear - fear that they're going to be as marginalized as they wanted everyone who played everything from original D&D to D&D3.5 to be.  That they're being told to shut up and go away, and their D&D is old and busted.  As much as I would like to see that happen, honestly what's coming down is going to be user-adjustable to the point that 4e players can tweak the game and not see any difference, and 1e players (and 2e and 3rd and 3.5) can do the same to their tastes.

Will it be perfect?  Will it work 100%?  HA!  When has any edition done that?

But as Gary Gygax said, it is the spirit of the rules, not the letter (for the benefit of our 4e playing friends, Gary Gygax was a guy who wrote AD&D)

Of course I also expect that there will be plenty of Grogn4rds unable or unwilling to accept it, and that's fine.  Doesn't change my 1e game, won't change my 5e game.