Thursday, June 12, 2008

Editions Of D&D and Me

Sometime this month, you've probably seen the advertisements or fliers for Dungeons and Dragons 4E (or seen the books themselves). I admit that I've not looked at them very extensively - nor do I want to. I do, however, have an opinion forming about it from what I have seen and heard; that opinion can be summed up in one word, and that word is 'no.'

Some of the more entertaining classes have been removed from the Player's Handbook; Barbarians were one of the better classes in D&D, and having them added back in was what initially drew me to D&D 3E. Now, one must wait for a supplement or an official release (both of which might cost you) in order to get them.

Another major change is on the list of player races. Gnomes have been removed, and Tieflings and Aasimar are now starting races with no real modifications. I'm sorry, but Tieflings and Aasimar were only supposed to be a rarity, even in Forgotten Realms (where they were apparently most common). Changing it that way seems to remove that last bit of believability that makes D&D so appealing to so many people.

Now, obviously there's nothing I can do, or could have done; but I still don't like these and other changes (such as a near requirement of miniatures and tiles according to the PHB's supplies list), and that's enough to keep me from paying good money to play it. I'll have a good enough time playing my now 'outdated' games that I shouldn't even miss the new stuff.

You may be wondering, what does Roy play, then? Well, for now, I'm engaged in preparing for an AD&D second edition game. My fiancee has a wonderful idea for one and has worked dilligently upon it. When we get together with her brother and his wife, then we'll start playing one of my favorite games of all time. Yes, it's very math intensive and archaic, but it's an excellent vehicle for that nostalgic feel.

One must never forget that their games are about entertainment and sharing; otherwise, it's only money and time you've handed off to someone else.

No comments: