paizo.com Recent Posts in WotC to republish old editions and non-random minispaizo.com Recent Posts in WotC to republish old editions and non-random minis2011-08-07T05:40:37Z2011-08-07T05:40:37ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisPathfinderFan64https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1402012-04-07T19:13:25Z2012-04-07T19:13:25Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">JoelF847 wrote:</div><blockquote> So, back to the actual thread topic - for the out of print books being published as PDFs, I saw someone mention that old novels are being put out electronically also. Does anyone know if the never published 5th Dark Matter book By Dust Consumed by Don Bassingthwaite is availible anywhere. If not, can anyone direct me to who or what board at Wizards.com would be the best way to request this? I know it never was printed, but it was released as a free PDF at one point, but I haven't been able to find it anywhere. </blockquote><p>I also would love to find this book or have it published. I have been looking for years for it.JoelF847 wrote:So, back to the actual thread topic - for the out of print books being published as PDFs, I saw someone mention that old novels are being put out electronically also. Does anyone know if the never published 5th Dark Matter book By Dust Consumed by Don Bassingthwaite is availible anywhere. If not, can anyone direct me to who or what board at Wizards.com would be the best way to request this? I know it never was printed, but it was released as a free PDF at one point, but I...PathfinderFan642012-04-07T19:13:25ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisMatthew Morris (RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1392011-08-19T14:56:49Z2011-08-19T14:56:49Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Josh M. wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Completely anecdotal opinion here, but I am much happier with the direction Paizo is taking the 3.5 ruleset with Pathfinder, than WotC was towards the end of 3.5's run. The last few 3.5 books were pretty scattered and terribly unbalanced, like they were just throwing out whatever last minute content they had before the big edition change. Paizo at least has a long-term focus, rather than just throwing books at customers with no updates or follow-up.
</p>
</blockquote><p>Spoiler because I'm meandering off topic...
</p>
[Spoiler omitted]</p>Josh M. wrote:Completely anecdotal opinion here, but I am much happier with the direction Paizo is taking the 3.5 ruleset with Pathfinder, than WotC was towards the end of 3.5's run. The last few 3.5 books were pretty scattered and terribly unbalanced, like they were just throwing out whatever last minute content they had before the big edition change. Paizo at least has a long-term focus, rather than just throwing books at customers with no updates or follow-up.
Spoiler because I'm...Matthew Morris (RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8)2011-08-19T14:56:49ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisJosh M. (alias of Jandrem)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1382011-08-19T13:32:20Z2011-08-19T13:32:20Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Razz wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">ShinHakkaider wrote:</div><blockquote><p> <a href="http://blogofholding.com/?p=3208" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">SEE HERE</a>
</p>
As for previous editions, it sounds like they'll do hardcopies as one of the other statements was that they're still trying to figure out how to price their PDF's. </blockquote>Wait, are they simply reprinting old edition books again? Or they going to create new books for older editions? I hope it's the latter...that'd be the best news I've ever heard from WotC! :D </blockquote><p>Going completely on a hunch, I would doubt that they would devote any development time to creating new material for older editions. The wording is so vague in the reference anyway. If they even simply made old PDF's available again, we should count our blessings.
<p>From a business standpoint, 4e is their baby and they should be devoting their creative efforts towards that, and all things related(board games, accesories, etc). New material for old editions just creates a domino effect of complications. Printing costs alone would be difficult to manage with so much material that gets cross-referenced. Not to mention trying to support multiple editions of the same game, at the same time, would be horrendously confusing to new customers as to "which one is just D&D?" and would spread WotC's creative department paper-thin. We'd get a lot of quantity, but the quality would likely plummet. </p>
<p>Older editions have a ton of material published as is. 3.x, with it's OGL, especially had countless other companies creating content for it. The usability of all that content is questionable, but it's there if you look for it. Creative DM's and players can retool any 3pp stuff to be made usable. Even better, we have <i>Pathfinder</i>, which gives us brand new content, and doesn't invalidate our 3.5e collections. </p>
<p>Completely anecdotal opinion here, but I am much happier with the direction Paizo is taking the 3.5 ruleset with Pathfinder, than WotC was towards the end of 3.5's run. The last few 3.5 books were pretty scattered and terribly unbalanced, like they were just throwing out whatever last minute content they had before the big edition change. Paizo at least has a long-term focus, rather than just throwing books at customers with no updates or follow-up.</p>Razz wrote:ShinHakkaider wrote:SEE HERE
As for previous editions, it sounds like they'll do hardcopies as one of the other statements was that they're still trying to figure out how to price their PDF's.
Wait, are they simply reprinting old edition books again? Or they going to create new books for older editions? I hope it's the latter...that'd be the best news I've ever heard from WotC! :D Going completely on a hunch, I would doubt that they would devote any development time to creating...Josh M. (alias of Jandrem)2011-08-19T13:32:20ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisRazzhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1372011-08-19T10:31:51Z2011-08-19T10:31:51Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">ShinHakkaider wrote:</div><blockquote><p> <a href="http://blogofholding.com/?p=3208" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">SEE HERE</a>
</p>
As for previous editions, it sounds like they'll do hardcopies as one of the other statements was that they're still trying to figure out how to price their PDF's. </blockquote><p>Wait, are they simply reprinting old edition books again? Or they going to create new books for older editions? I hope it's the latter...that'd be the best news I've ever heard from WotC! :DShinHakkaider wrote:SEE HERE
As for previous editions, it sounds like they'll do hardcopies as one of the other statements was that they're still trying to figure out how to price their PDF's.
Wait, are they simply reprinting old edition books again? Or they going to create new books for older editions? I hope it's the latter...that'd be the best news I've ever heard from WotC! :DRazz2011-08-19T10:31:51ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisCrimson Jesterhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1362011-08-15T22:09:47Z2011-08-15T22:09:47Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">ProfessorCirno wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Josh M. wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">ProfessorCirno wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Yeah, next those dastardly wizards of the coast will decide to measure everything in inches rather then squares or feet, so that everything is connected to how tall miniatures are!</p>
<p>Wait no that was previous editions that literally fit your every complaint.</p>
<p><i>My bad!</i> </blockquote>Are you ever <i>not</i> snarky? </blockquote><p><a href="http://xkcd.com/386/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">When people aren't being willfully wrong or insulting, yes :)</a>
<p>"4e is a boardgame and D&D has never been about minis" is both, albeit in the opposite order! </blockquote><p>FIFYProfessorCirno wrote:Josh M. wrote: ProfessorCirno wrote:Yeah, next those dastardly wizards of the coast will decide to measure everything in inches rather then squares or feet, so that everything is connected to how tall miniatures are!
Wait no that was previous editions that literally fit your every complaint.
My bad!
Are you ever not snarky? When people aren't being willfully wrong or insulting, yes :) "4e is a boardgame and D&D has never been about minis" is both, albeit in the...Crimson Jester2011-08-15T22:09:47ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisLipto the Shivhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1352011-08-13T06:02:08Z2011-08-13T06:02:08Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">firbolg wrote:</div><blockquote> Just for clarity, <a href="http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/20743.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">here are the Hobby Industry estimated sales chart, from Q2 2011</a> </blockquote><p>Makes me wonder just what percentage of sales each line is getting.
<p>Also, kinda happy that Shadowrun is on the list.</p>
<p>Also also, really surprised that Shadowrun sales are being beat by the Dragon Age RPG...</p>firbolg wrote:Just for clarity, here are the Hobby Industry estimated sales chart, from Q2 2011
Makes me wonder just what percentage of sales each line is getting. Also, kinda happy that Shadowrun is on the list.
Also also, really surprised that Shadowrun sales are being beat by the Dragon Age RPG...Lipto the Shiv2011-08-13T06:02:08ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisProfessorCirnohttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1342011-08-13T02:02:51Z2011-08-13T01:46:06Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Josh M. wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">ProfessorCirno wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Yeah, next those dastardly wizards of the coast will decide to measure everything in inches rather then squares or feet, so that everything is connected to how tall miniatures are!</p>
<p>Wait no that was previous editions that literally fit your every complaint.</p>
<p><i>My bad!</i> </blockquote>Are you ever <i>not</i> snarky? </blockquote><p>When people aren't being willfully wrong or insulting, yes :)
<p>"4e is a boardgame and D&D has never been about minis" is both, albeit in the opposite order!</p>Josh M. wrote:ProfessorCirno wrote:Yeah, next those dastardly wizards of the coast will decide to measure everything in inches rather then squares or feet, so that everything is connected to how tall miniatures are!
Wait no that was previous editions that literally fit your every complaint.
My bad!
Are you ever not snarky? When people aren't being willfully wrong or insulting, yes :) "4e is a boardgame and D&D has never been about minis" is both, albeit in the opposite order!ProfessorCirno2011-08-13T01:46:06ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisbrockhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1332011-08-12T21:58:01Z2011-08-12T21:58:01Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">JoelF847 wrote:</div><blockquote> So, back to the actual thread topic - for the out of print books being published as PDFs, I saw someone mention that old novels are being put out electronically also. Does anyone know if the never published 5th Dark Matter book By Dust Consumed by Don Bassingthwaite is availible anywhere. If not, can anyone direct me to who or what board at Wizards.com would be the best way to request this? I know it never was printed, but it was released as a free PDF at one point, but I haven't been able to find it anywhere. </blockquote><p>Let's get back to the really interesting question ;-)JoelF847 wrote:So, back to the actual thread topic - for the out of print books being published as PDFs, I saw someone mention that old novels are being put out electronically also. Does anyone know if the never published 5th Dark Matter book By Dust Consumed by Don Bassingthwaite is availible anywhere. If not, can anyone direct me to who or what board at Wizards.com would be the best way to request this? I know it never was printed, but it was released as a free PDF at one point, but I...brock2011-08-12T21:58:01ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisJosh M. (alias of Jandrem)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1322011-08-12T16:59:04Z2011-08-12T16:59:04Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">ProfessorCirno wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Yeah, next those dastardly wizards of the coast will decide to measure everything in inches rather then squares or feet, so that everything is connected to how tall miniatures are!</p>
<p>Wait no that was previous editions that literally fit your every complaint.</p>
<p><i>My bad!</i> </blockquote><p>Are you ever <i>not</i> snarky?ProfessorCirno wrote:Yeah, next those dastardly wizards of the coast will decide to measure everything in inches rather then squares or feet, so that everything is connected to how tall miniatures are!
Wait no that was previous editions that literally fit your every complaint.
My bad!
Are you ever not snarky?Josh M. (alias of Jandrem)2011-08-12T16:59:04ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minissunshadow21https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1312011-08-12T16:25:39Z2011-08-12T16:25:39Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Robert Little wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">sunshadow21 wrote:</div><blockquote> The one thing in 4E that jumped out at me right away regarding mini's and the battle mat was the earlier editions measured ranges and movements in actual units of measure, like feet or inches, that people could conceptualize without too much problem and included how to convert those to number of squares for use on a battle mat. 4E just has squares, and without a battle mat or something similar to refer to, something measured primarily in squares is going to be very hard to measure. Even if the base assumption is 5' squares, they still have to add all of those squares up and reach a total or have something in front of them to give them something to base their mental calculations on before they can comfortably visualize the full distance. While not a game breaker or something particularly hard to overcome, someone new to the game in 4E is going to have a harder time working without a battle mat because they aren't as likely to have that experience of thinking in terms of anything other than squares. </blockquote>That was actually something that they had a very good reason for. By eliminating a specific measure they made the rules more universal for folks playing in both the Imperial and Metric systems, without having to re-edit to accommodate whatever the local system of measure was. </blockquote><p>I guess that makes sense. I hadn't really thought about the battle mat as being a tool to cross cultural boundaries, but I suppose it works since most people would be using one anyway.Robert Little wrote:sunshadow21 wrote: The one thing in 4E that jumped out at me right away regarding mini's and the battle mat was the earlier editions measured ranges and movements in actual units of measure, like feet or inches, that people could conceptualize without too much problem and included how to convert those to number of squares for use on a battle mat. 4E just has squares, and without a battle mat or something similar to refer to, something measured primarily in squares is going...sunshadow212011-08-12T16:25:39ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisMatthew Koelblhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1302011-08-12T15:27:15Z2011-08-12T15:27:15Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">James Martin wrote:</div><blockquote><p>There's no confusion. With the advent of 3.5 and even more so with 4e, the trend has been to make miniatures more incorporated into the core rule system. Add into this trend Dungeon Tiles, the modular room format of the delve approach to adventures and now, the D&D board games that seem to be increasingly produced by WotC, not to mention the aborted D&D/Heroscape-miniatures game and what you have is a trend toward a more board game-like system of tabletop role-playing. I'm not arguing whether this is a good or bad thing, but it does seem to be a way in which the creators of D&D are moving. The mindset behind it could be that board games are popular and in order to peel away some players from that hobby, you emulate that hobby. Or it may be that,as I stated above, board games are more culturally acceptable than RPGs have been historically.</p>
<p>Yes, there have always been D&D board games, but the discussion is about the aspects of D&D which are being slowly evolved into something closer to a board game set-up. The two are different topics entirely. </blockquote><p>Ok, maybe the confusion is mine. I'm not sure if I'm operating under the same definition of "board game" as you are. I think, though, it is important to recognize a difference between "table-top" and "board game". 3rd Edition and 4E definitely have a stronger emphasis on the tabletop format, the use of minis and maps as tools for the game. But physical representations of characters, scenes and monsters... have precisely nothing to do with board games.
<p>Similarly, the delve format is just a method of arranging data. Nothing about it strikes as somehow 'less of a roleplaying game and more of a board-game'. And, as noted - the miniatures game and board game releases are seperate products based on the same brand, and neither indicate nor have any impact on the RPG itself. </p>
<p>I do get that you aren't saying "a shift towards board games is good and/or bad". But you <i>are</i> saying, "the recent editions of D&D are evoling into something similar to a board game", and I really don't see any indication this is the case.</p>James Martin wrote:There's no confusion. With the advent of 3.5 and even more so with 4e, the trend has been to make miniatures more incorporated into the core rule system. Add into this trend Dungeon Tiles, the modular room format of the delve approach to adventures and now, the D&D board games that seem to be increasingly produced by WotC, not to mention the aborted D&D/Heroscape-miniatures game and what you have is a trend toward a more board game-like system of tabletop role-playing. I'm...Matthew Koelbl2011-08-12T15:27:15ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisRobert Littlehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1292011-08-12T15:13:34Z2011-08-12T15:13:34Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">sunshadow21 wrote:</div><blockquote> The one thing in 4E that jumped out at me right away regarding mini's and the battle mat was the earlier editions measured ranges and movements in actual units of measure, like feet or inches, that people could conceptualize without too much problem and included how to convert those to number of squares for use on a battle mat. 4E just has squares, and without a battle mat or something similar to refer to, something measured primarily in squares is going to be very hard to measure. Even if the base assumption is 5' squares, they still have to add all of those squares up and reach a total or have something in front of them to give them something to base their mental calculations on before they can comfortably visualize the full distance. While not a game breaker or something particularly hard to overcome, someone new to the game in 4E is going to have a harder time working without a battle mat because they aren't as likely to have that experience of thinking in terms of anything other than squares. </blockquote><p>That was actually something that they had a very good reason for. By eliminating a specific measure they made the rules more universal for folks playing in both the Imperial and Metric systems, without having to re-edit to accommodate whatever the local system of measure was.sunshadow21 wrote:The one thing in 4E that jumped out at me right away regarding mini's and the battle mat was the earlier editions measured ranges and movements in actual units of measure, like feet or inches, that people could conceptualize without too much problem and included how to convert those to number of squares for use on a battle mat. 4E just has squares, and without a battle mat or something similar to refer to, something measured primarily in squares is going to be very hard to...Robert Little2011-08-12T15:13:34ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisDeathQuaker (RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1282011-08-12T19:04:07Z2011-08-12T14:22:30Z<p>Next thing you know, WotC will make it SO reliant on miniature tactics they'll change the name of the game to Chainmail... </p>
<p>[Spoiler omitted]</p>Next thing you know, WotC will make it SO reliant on miniature tactics they'll change the name of the game to Chainmail...
[Spoiler omitted]DeathQuaker (RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8)2011-08-12T14:22:30ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisfirbolghttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1272011-08-12T04:51:48Z2011-08-12T04:51:48Z<p>Just for clarity, <a href="http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/20743.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">here are the Hobby Industry estimated sales chart, from Q2 2011</a></p>Just for clarity, here are the Hobby Industry estimated sales chart, from Q2 2011firbolg2011-08-12T04:51:48ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisXaaon of Korvosa (alias of Xaaon of Xen'Drik)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1262011-08-12T04:37:21Z2011-08-12T04:37:21Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">sunshadow21 wrote:</div><blockquote> The one thing in 4E that jumped out at me right away regarding mini's and the battle mat was the earlier editions measured ranges and movements in actual units of measure, like feet or inches, that people could conceptualize without too much problem and included how to convert those to number of squares for use on a battle mat. 4E just has squares, and without a battle mat or something similar to refer to, something measured primarily in squares is going to be very hard to measure. Even if the base assumption is 5' squares, they still have to add all of those squares up and reach a total or have something in front of them to give them something to base their mental calculations on before they can comfortably visualize the full distance. While not a game breaker or something particularly hard to overcome, someone new to the game in 4E is going to have a harder time working without a battle mat because they aren't as likely to have that experience of thinking in terms of anything other than squares. </blockquote><p>And the numbers were different in indoor and outdoors locations.sunshadow21 wrote:The one thing in 4E that jumped out at me right away regarding mini's and the battle mat was the earlier editions measured ranges and movements in actual units of measure, like feet or inches, that people could conceptualize without too much problem and included how to convert those to number of squares for use on a battle mat. 4E just has squares, and without a battle mat or something similar to refer to, something measured primarily in squares is going to be very hard to...Xaaon of Korvosa (alias of Xaaon of Xen'Drik)2011-08-12T04:37:21ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minissunshadow21https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1252011-08-12T04:23:25Z2011-08-12T04:23:25Z<p>The one thing in 4E that jumped out at me right away regarding mini's and the battle mat was the earlier editions measured ranges and movements in actual units of measure, like feet or inches, that people could conceptualize without too much problem and included how to convert those to number of squares for use on a battle mat. 4E just has squares, and without a battle mat or something similar to refer to, something measured primarily in squares is going to be very hard to measure. Even if the base assumption is 5' squares, they still have to add all of those squares up and reach a total or have something in front of them to give them something to base their mental calculations on before they can comfortably visualize the full distance. While not a game breaker or something particularly hard to overcome, someone new to the game in 4E is going to have a harder time working without a battle mat because they aren't as likely to have that experience of thinking in terms of anything other than squares.</p>The one thing in 4E that jumped out at me right away regarding mini's and the battle mat was the earlier editions measured ranges and movements in actual units of measure, like feet or inches, that people could conceptualize without too much problem and included how to convert those to number of squares for use on a battle mat. 4E just has squares, and without a battle mat or something similar to refer to, something measured primarily in squares is going to be very hard to measure. Even if...sunshadow212011-08-12T04:23:25ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random ministhenobledrakehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1242011-08-12T04:13:13Z2011-08-12T04:13:13Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:</div><blockquote>Compare and contrast to 2nd edition where the rules where designed with absolutely no explicit assumption of mini's until roughly Skills and Powers.</blockquote><p>To make that "roughly" a bit more accurate: Combat & Tactics.
<p>I still use the missile and melee scale rules from that book every now and then - helps when I want an encounter to start with the opposed forces hundreds of feat apart and then close into melee but keep everyone mindful of the terrain by drawing it out.</p>
<p>And to add my opinion to the mix of this minis-needed nonsense: Every edition of D&D has made the suggestion that minis make things easier to keep track of during play. That is an irrefutable fact, so let's not bother arguing it.</p>
<p>The real debate going on here is whether 3.5 and 4th make that suggestion <i>too firmly</i> and leave you with a game that is much harder to manage without minis - and I find that to be untrue for 3.5, since not having facing actually ends up making it easier to run mini-free than prior editions, and decently true for 4e where you need placement to determine a larger number of the "fiddly bits" of the system that cause player character abilities to suffer if simply hand-waived like you can manage in 3.5 (cover, concealment, flanking, number of adjacent opponents, and so on)</p>
<p>I think the thing that really gets people going on the "requires minis" front is that WotC sold/will be selling their own D&D branded minis, which makes it look like their aren't just saying "Using minis can be helpful," when they mention miniatures in their books.</p>Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:Compare and contrast to 2nd edition where the rules where designed with absolutely no explicit assumption of mini's until roughly Skills and Powers.
To make that "roughly" a bit more accurate: Combat & Tactics. I still use the missile and melee scale rules from that book every now and then - helps when I want an encounter to start with the opposed forces hundreds of feat apart and then close into melee but keep everyone mindful of the terrain by drawing it out.
And...thenobledrake2011-08-12T04:13:13ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisJeremy Mac Donaldhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1232011-08-12T03:49:14Z2011-08-12T03:49:14Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Auxmaulous wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
LOL! Sorry, no comparison!
<br />
A few paragraphs don't compare to the multitude of minis dependent rules in 3rd and 4th edition. </p>
<p>BTW, page 69-70 is the basic format to see how many opponents can surround a foe and attack - you could use paper and draw X's and O's or just visualize it and get the same results.
<br />
The diagram and rules on pg 69-70 =/= 3rd and 4th edition miniatures dependent rules. </p>
<p>The rules your referenced on pg 69-70 are standard combat rules - minis or no minis. You are taking the history of where the game came from (with some vestigial miniatures aspect from Chainmail) and comparing it to the very HARD CODED miniatures based (with visual aids provided by their miniatures line) movement and combat of 3rd edition. </p>
<p>This comparison is just dishonest and absurd, all for the sake of blindly defending Wotc. There is no comparison between the emphasis placed on minis between 1st and 3rd/4th. </p>
<p>If you have problems running a fight with a Beholder without minis I don't know what to tell you - it wasn't that hard. That argument is reminiscent to the 4e commercials depicting the difficulties of using THAC0, just a laughable false dilemma.</blockquote><p>No I'm pointing out that 1E presumed miniatures. I was explicit that it was certianly possible to play it with out but the presumption was they where in. Compare and contrast to 2nd edition where the rules where designed with absolutely no explicit assumption of mini's until roughly Skills and Powers.
<p>Note that to use the rules for combat one of the key elements is facing. You can't determine whether something is a flank or rear attack in 1E unless you have facing. X's and O's on graph paper are possible but only if you are clear as to which direction those X's and O's are facing.</p>
<p>The Beholder is possible to fight without a miniature and facing but it requires that the DM make up house rules to do it...or you have access to Dragon, there was an article in one of their issues that provided an alternate system. </p>
<p>Now I played 1E mostly without miniatures myself - it was pretty easy to do, just ignore the rules on page 69-70 and house rule any other cases that come up. </p>
<p>1E presumes miniatures. Saying that they are not nearly as necessary for play as 3rd and 4th does not negate that. Early 2nd edition, in contrast, does not presume miniatures and stays away from concepts like facing to make sure that things play well without them. Saying that 1E had nothing to do with miniatures except for a measurement system that itself had nothing to do with miniatures but was a purely a vestigial left over from chainmail is factually inaccurate. Saying it was pretty easy to play 1E without them on the other hand is perfectly true.</p>Auxmaulous wrote:LOL! Sorry, no comparison!
A few paragraphs don't compare to the multitude of minis dependent rules in 3rd and 4th edition. BTW, page 69-70 is the basic format to see how many opponents can surround a foe and attack - you could use paper and draw X's and O's or just visualize it and get the same results.
The diagram and rules on pg 69-70 =/= 3rd and 4th edition miniatures dependent rules.
The rules your referenced on pg 69-70 are standard combat rules - minis or no minis....Jeremy Mac Donald2011-08-12T03:49:14ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisAuxmauloushttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1222011-08-12T02:47:40Z2011-08-12T02:47:40Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Go pick up your 1E DMG. You'll want to look at page 10 for, I believe the first reference to miniatures. Page 69 covers most of the elements involved in their use such as flank and rear attacks. Other elements presume their use as well, for example the flight rules and grenade like missiles. Even some of the monsters presume that mini's are in existence. If you played without them did you ever stumble into what the hell to do with the ACs of the Beholder? I mean it has different ACs depending on what part of its miniature your facing. Some of the other monsters had that as well - though the beholder is the most famous. </blockquote><p>LOL! Sorry, no comparison!
</p>
A few paragraphs don't compare to the multitude of minis dependent rules in 3rd and 4th edition. </p>
<p>BTW, page 69-70 is the basic format to see how many opponents can surround a foe and attack - you could use paper and draw X's and O's or just visualize it and get the same results.
<br />
The diagram and rules on pg 69-70 =/= 3rd and 4th edition miniatures dependent rules. </p>
<p>The rules your referenced on pg 69-70 are standard combat rules - minis or no minis. You are taking the history of where the game came from (with some vestigial miniatures aspect from Chainmail) and comparing it to the very HARD CODED miniatures based (with visual aids provided by their miniatures line) movement and combat of 3rd edition. </p>
<p>This comparison is just dishonest and absurd, all for the sake of blindly defending Wotc. There is no comparison between the emphasis placed on minis between 1st and 3rd/4th. </p>
<p>If you have problems running a fight with a Beholder without minis I don't know what to tell you - it wasn't that hard. That argument is reminiscent to the 4e commercials depicting the difficulties of using THAC0, just a laughable false dilemma. </p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>TSR did have a vested interest in miniature lines. The DMG is very explicit that ONLY Grenadier's line of D&D miniatures are 'real' D&D miniatures. I don't think any modern company would admonish the player base in this manner on correct or incorrect fantasy supplements they should use in their home game - it'd be seen as insulting to the player base.</blockquote><p>I consider the GSL an open attack on companies producing 3rd edition material since that was not the "true edition". TSR did it via lawsuits, Wotc did it with the threat of being cut off from the trough (and lawsuits).
<p>And just to be clear, I fully believe that if TSR could have come out with a collectable minis game to complement their core game they would have, I'm not painting them out to be saints. But this repeated "it was a miniatures game too!" cry is just moronic. It wasn't a miniatures dependent game, if they saw the money and if the market was there you bet your ass they would have tried to turn it into one but that doesn't change how things really were back then.</p>Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:Go pick up your 1E DMG. You'll want to look at page 10 for, I believe the first reference to miniatures. Page 69 covers most of the elements involved in their use such as flank and rear attacks. Other elements presume their use as well, for example the flight rules and grenade like missiles. Even some of the monsters presume that mini's are in existence. If you played without them did you ever stumble into what the hell to do with the ACs of the Beholder? I mean it has...Auxmaulous2011-08-12T02:47:40ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisXaaon of Korvosa (alias of Xaaon of Xen'Drik)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1212011-08-12T02:10:56Z2011-08-12T02:10:56Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Heymitch wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">ProfessorCirno wrote:</div><blockquote>I'm saying that the trend isn't a thing. D&D has always been minis centric save for possibly Basic and <i>maybe</i> 2e.</blockquote><p>I agree with some of what you're saying, Professor, but not completely. It's true that minis have been a staple of D&D from the beginning, but the game became much more tactical in nature with 3.0/3.5/4E. It's very difficult to play without figures (or something) to identify precisely where characters are in relation to one another, especially since Attacks of Opportunity entered the picture. Of course, that has nothing to do with Hasbro.
<p>I'm not saying that's a bad thing (I like minis), but back when I played AD&D we mostly just used minis to represent a marching order. We never felt as though we really needed a battle map or grid for exact placement.</p>
<p>Although, maybe the fact that I <i>need</i> minis to play the game has something to do with the fact that I have more disposable income than I did in 1977. </blockquote><p>Don't need minis, you can use a battlemat and just draaw it on there, or you can use counters, or paper minis.
<p>I like Dresden Files use of zones. Makes combats pretty cinematic, haven't sat down and figured out a way to convert that system for PFRPG though.</p>Heymitch wrote:ProfessorCirno wrote:I'm saying that the trend isn't a thing. D&D has always been minis centric save for possibly Basic and maybe 2e.
I agree with some of what you're saying, Professor, but not completely. It's true that minis have been a staple of D&D from the beginning, but the game became much more tactical in nature with 3.0/3.5/4E. It's very difficult to play without figures (or something) to identify precisely where characters are in relation to one another, especially...Xaaon of Korvosa (alias of Xaaon of Xen'Drik)2011-08-12T02:10:56ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisEpic RPG Blog (alias of Xaaon of Xen'Drik)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1202011-08-12T02:07:05Z2011-08-12T02:07:05Z<p>I listened to the full seminar. </p>
<p>I think they're taking a good direction, while I have not been a 4e supporter, I listened to what they said in the seminar and there were some good lessons they seem to have learned. </p>
<p>1. More open play-testing (including the new skirmish rules to go along with the minis.)
<br />
2. Less but higher quality products
<br />
3. Euro style Board Game - <i>Lords of Waterdeep</i>
<br />
(which may be the first WotC product I pick up in over 3 years)
<br />
4. Non-collectible, stock mini sets. (because in this economy random is bad.)</p>
<p>I have a big reaction thread on my blog.</p>I listened to the full seminar.
I think they're taking a good direction, while I have not been a 4e supporter, I listened to what they said in the seminar and there were some good lessons they seem to have learned.
1. More open play-testing (including the new skirmish rules to go along with the minis.)
2. Less but higher quality products
3. Euro style Board Game - Lords of Waterdeep
(which may be the first WotC product I pick up in over 3 years)
4. Non-collectible, stock mini sets. (because...Epic RPG Blog (alias of Xaaon of Xen'Drik)2011-08-12T02:07:05ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisJeremy Mac Donaldhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1192011-08-12T01:52:16Z2011-08-12T01:52:16Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Auxmaulous wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">ProfessorCirno wrote:</div><blockquote> I'm saying that the trend isn't a thing. D&D has always been minis centric save for possibly Basic and 1st/2ed. </blockquote><p>fixed!
<p>And before you start railing about the "measurement system/range, blah, blah" in 1st or 2nd, yeah it was derived from a minis based game and that was the system they adapted to measure range and movement. All the core books from 1st/2nd ed era had little support for detailed miniature combat, board movement, etc. None really. They just like to use inches the same way they liked to use the word "level" for everything (class, spell, dungeon).</p>
<p>TSR didn't even support minis on the physical product side. This was a WotC generated idea to marry a strong supported minis line with the core RPG. </blockquote><p>Go pick up your 1E DMG. You'll want to look at page 10 for, I believe the first reference to miniatures. Page 69 covers most of the elements involved in their use such as flank and rear attacks. Other elements presume their use as well, for example the flight rules and grenade like missiles. Even some of the monsters presume that mini's are in existence. If you played without them did you ever stumble into what the hell to do with the ACs of the Beholder? I mean it has different ACs depending on what part of its miniature your facing. Some of the other monsters had that as well - though the beholder is the most famous.
<p>1E was pretty easy to play without them for sure but the presumption was they where in use.</p>
<p>TSR did have a vested interest in miniature lines. The DMG is very explicit that ONLY Grenadier's line of D&D miniatures are 'real' D&D miniatures. I don't think any modern company would admonish the player base in this manner on correct or incorrect fantasy supplements they should use in their home game - it'd be seen as insulting to the player base.</p>Auxmaulous wrote:ProfessorCirno wrote: I'm saying that the trend isn't a thing. D&D has always been minis centric save for possibly Basic and 1st/2ed.
fixed! And before you start railing about the "measurement system/range, blah, blah" in 1st or 2nd, yeah it was derived from a minis based game and that was the system they adapted to measure range and movement. All the core books from 1st/2nd ed era had little support for detailed miniature combat, board movement, etc. None really. They just...Jeremy Mac Donald2011-08-12T01:52:16ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisHeymitchhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1182011-08-12T01:09:21Z2011-08-12T01:09:21Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">ProfessorCirno wrote:</div><blockquote>I'm saying that the trend isn't a thing. D&D has always been minis centric save for possibly Basic and <i>maybe</i> 2e.</blockquote><p>I agree with some of what you're saying, Professor, but not completely. It's true that minis have been a staple of D&D from the beginning, but the game became much more tactical in nature with 3.0/3.5/4E. It's very difficult to play without figures (or something) to identify precisely where characters are in relation to one another, especially since Attacks of Opportunity entered the picture. Of course, that has nothing to do with Hasbro.
<p>I'm not saying that's a bad thing (I like minis), but back when I played AD&D we mostly just used minis to represent a marching order. We never felt as though we really needed a battle map or grid for exact placement.</p>
<p>Although, maybe the fact that I <i>need</i> minis to play the game has something to do with the fact that I have more disposable income than I did in 1977.</p>ProfessorCirno wrote:I'm saying that the trend isn't a thing. D&D has always been minis centric save for possibly Basic and maybe 2e.
I agree with some of what you're saying, Professor, but not completely. It's true that minis have been a staple of D&D from the beginning, but the game became much more tactical in nature with 3.0/3.5/4E. It's very difficult to play without figures (or something) to identify precisely where characters are in relation to one another, especially since Attacks of...Heymitch2011-08-12T01:09:21ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisAuxmauloushttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1172011-08-12T01:08:19Z2011-08-12T01:08:19Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">ProfessorCirno wrote:</div><blockquote> I'm saying that the trend isn't a thing. D&D has always been minis centric save for possibly Basic and 1st/2ed. </blockquote><p>fixed!
<p>And before you start railing about the "measurement system/range, blah, blah" in 1st or 2nd, yeah it was derived from a minis based game and that was the system they adapted to measure range and movement. All the core books from 1st/2nd ed era had little support for detailed miniature combat, board movement, etc. None really. They just like to use inches the same way they liked to use the word "level" for everything (class, spell, dungeon).</p>
<p>TSR didn't even support minis on the physical product side. This was a WotC generated idea to marry a strong supported minis line with the core RPG.</p>ProfessorCirno wrote:I'm saying that the trend isn't a thing. D&D has always been minis centric save for possibly Basic and 1st/2ed.
fixed! And before you start railing about the "measurement system/range, blah, blah" in 1st or 2nd, yeah it was derived from a minis based game and that was the system they adapted to measure range and movement. All the core books from 1st/2nd ed era had little support for detailed miniature combat, board movement, etc. None really. They just like to use inches...Auxmaulous2011-08-12T01:08:19ZRe: Forums/Gamer Life: General Discussion: WotC to republish old editions and non-random minisJames Martin (RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, 2011 Top 32)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mnvj&page=3?WotC-to-republish-old-editions-and-nonrandom#1162011-08-12T01:06:40Z2011-08-12T01:06:40Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">ProfessorCirno wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
I'm saying that the trend isn't a thing. D&D has always been minis centric save for possibly Basic and <i>maybe</i> 2e. </blockquote><p>And you catch more intelligent responses with polite discourse than sarcasm. We'll have to agree to disagree: I don't have any significant experience with pre-3rd edition D&D to continue the debate.ProfessorCirno wrote:I'm saying that the trend isn't a thing. D&D has always been minis centric save for possibly Basic and maybe 2e.
And you catch more intelligent responses with polite discourse than sarcasm. We'll have to agree to disagree: I don't have any significant experience with pre-3rd edition D&D to continue the debate.James Martin (RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, 2011 Top 32)2011-08-12T01:06:40Z