
Yorrik |

Hi there. I've recently found this place and downloaded the alpha 3 rules and can only say that I am extremely happy to see what is being done here. The noble effort to keep D&D 3.5 alive is just about the most worthy thing I've seen done in the RPG industry as of late. Even more worthy than helping some masked man find his true love and a Spaniard get revenge for the death of his dad... and that says a lot. What is most important about it to me is that I have seen that Paizo has been keeping the name alive. The name Dungeons and Dragons. That is the heart of the matter to me.
My friends and I have gotten our hands on 4E and read the rules and looked it over and yadda yadda. We are going to try and play it. We are going to give it a chance. However, we have all come to agree that the game is truly not D&D any more. It lost something. A lot of something. It lost enough of the something that was D&D that we are no longer even calling it by that lofty old name. To me it has become...
Fred.
Yup, Fred. We are calling it Fred the RPG system. I just feel wrong calling it D&D. It makes me feel like I'm kicking Gygax's headstone or something. So that's what's in a name to me. All my fond memories of the past. All the ones yet to come. Though I may try out Fred, I will always play D&D 3.5 for the fun it has given me and continues to give me all the time. It is a familiar and friendly name.
So, thank you Paizo. Thank you very much for what you are doing here in keeping the spirit of the name of D&D alive. At least alive in my eyes. I wish you all the luck in the world with this and will gladly support you when it is released. Also, just so no one thinks I'm being mean to WotC, I do wish them all the luck in the world with Fred. It just isn't the game I grew up with any more. 'Nuff said.
Yorrik

hallucitor |

Fred.
Yup, Fred. We are calling it Fred the RPG system. I just feel wrong calling it D&D. It makes me feel like I'm kicking Gygax's headstone or something. So that's what's in a name to me. All my fond memories of the past. All the ones yet to come. Though I may try out Fred, I will always play D&D 3.5 for the fun it has given me and continues to give me all the time. It is a familiar and friendly name.
Yorrik
Good idea, although I'm considering calling 4th edition "Rick", that way I could spell the new system's name with a silent P....
(apologies to all named Richard, Rick, or Dicky out there...)
Darrin Drader Contributor |

Hi there. I've recently found this place and downloaded the alpha 3 rules and can only say that I am extremely happy to see what is being done here. The noble effort to keep D&D 3.5 alive is just about the most worthy thing I've seen done in the RPG industry as of late. Even more worthy than helping some masked man find his true love and a Spaniard get revenge for the death of his dad... and that says a lot.
Inconceivable!
My friends and I have gotten our hands on 4E and read the rules and looked it over and yadda yadda. We are going to try and play it. We are going to give it a chance. However, we have all come to agree that the game is truly not D&D any more. It lost something. A lot of something. It lost enough of the something that was D&D that we are no longer even calling it by that lofty old name. To me it has become...Fred.
I feel much like you do, and as a freelancer, I don't think the GSL is good for the industry. Welcome aboard Yorrik! Glad to see you here, I hope you stick around.

Dennis da Ogre |

Personally I'm calling it FINO (Fourth In Name Only) because for the life of me I can't figure out what the 3 previous editions of that game are.
Well actually it should be 5th or 6th edition. Well books are generally considered new editions whenever you republish it with updates. In that sense first edition was the little handout that they used to convert from Chainmail the red box set was the second edition, AD&D was the third edition, Second Edition was the Second Edition of AD&D but the Fourth Edition of D&D. Third Edition was the Fifth Edition of D&D, etc...
If you want to talk about versions in the software sense then I would have to say that the chainmail rules were the Beta, RedBox was 1.0, AD&D 2.0, AD&D 2nd Edition was 2.1. D&D 3.0 was coincidentally 3.0 and 3.5 was 3.1. In that case 4e is actually named correctly although for the wrong reasons.
The reason I say this is because the bigger version numbers completely break compatibility with older versions.

R_Chance |

Well actually it should be 5th or 6th edition. Well books are generally considered new editions whenever you republish it with updates. In that sense first edition was the little handout that they used to convert from Chainmail the red box set was the second edition, AD&D was the third edition, Second Edition was the Second Edition of AD&D but the Fourth Edition of D&D. Third Edition was the Fifth Edition of D&D, etc...
If you want to talk about versions in the software sense then I would have to say that the chainmail rules were the Beta, RedBox was 1.0, AD&D 2.0, AD&D 2nd Edition was 2.1. D&D 3.0 was coincidentally 3.0 and 3.5 was 3.1. In that case 4e is actually named correctly although for the wrong reasons.
The reason I say this is because the bigger version numbers completely break compatibility with older versions.
Actually, Chainmail, woodprint box D&D, white box D&D (plus supplements -- the Greyhawk supplement really made it a better game all around), AD&D, Basic D&D (Red, Blue etc.), 2nd Edition AD&D, 3E, 3.5E IIRC... sorry I can't bring myself to name that... game they've got now. Iv'e got all of them except the current offering (I did look it over, no thanks). Even the one I never played (Basic) that I admit taking ideas from. No difference between the woodprint and white box versions IIRC. Except the woodprint had the label slapped on by Don Kaye and Gary Gygax personally and the white box had the name etc. printed on it. Next up, The Pathfinder Role Playing Game. The game goes on.

Freesword |
Freesword wrote:Personally I'm calling it FINO (Fourth In Name Only) because for the life of me I can't figure out what the 3 previous editions of that game are.Well actually it should be 5th or 6th edition. Well books are generally considered new editions whenever you republish it with updates. In that sense first edition was the little handout that they used to convert from Chainmail the red box set was the second edition, AD&D was the third edition, Second Edition was the Second Edition of AD&D but the Fourth Edition of D&D. Third Edition was the Fifth Edition of D&D, etc...
If you want to talk about versions in the software sense then I would have to say that the chainmail rules were the Beta, RedBox was 1.0, AD&D 2.0, AD&D 2nd Edition was 2.1. D&D 3.0 was coincidentally 3.0 and 3.5 was 3.1. In that case 4e is actually named correctly although for the wrong reasons.
The reason I say this is because the bigger version numbers completely break compatibility with older versions.
Actually, the first edition of AD&D had 2 versions (Had to remove some things like the Cthulhu Mythos), so that should be 2.0 and 2.1. That would make 2nd edition 2.5, with the Players Option books (Skills & Powers) 2.6.
For the record, my earliest books were second release of 1st ed. AD&D. From that point to present there has been a recognizable connection from one edition to the next that FINO lacks. I realize this was deliberate on the part of WotC to break with the OGL. Still to me it is a completely different game rather than an evolution of the game I have been playing.

DrowVampyre |

Good idea, although I'm considering calling 4th edition "Rick", that way I could spell the new system's name with a silent P....
(apologies to all named Richard, Rick, or Dicky out there...)
Would that mean anyone who plays 4th edition, in which many dice are rolled,has been Rickrolled? ^_-