Shoeld 5th edition mention other editions ?

Should 5th edition activly mention older editions and campaign settings ?

for example in the cosmolegy section you could find somthing like:
the default assumed cosmolegy is the great weel this is the cosmolegy that was also used in many of the older editions of DnD.
later in this section you can also find alternatives like the world tree taken from the forgotten realms campaign setting, or the ( forgot it's name) cosmolegy taken from the 4th edition of DnD.

or would such refrences just be confusing to new players ?


 
They don't seem to care for new players/costumer to be fair or even their current userbase...their entire development and focus are on bring back former players
If we're talking player's handbook, then I'd say no. The handbook should be for teaching the current edition of the game. The one exception to that I think should be a quick history of the game near the usual welcome to the edition blurb. New players should have some appreciation for the history of the game, and it might fuel some people's interest in looking into older editions of the game.

If we're talking DMG, then I'd say yes, where it's appropriate. I've always felt it was vital for a DM to be steeped in the game's past as well as its present, if for no other reason than to see how previous editions did things and take some inspiration away from that.
I disagree, a game should be able to completly stand on it's own, if it can't, then it fails completly.
You can't have a fifth incarnation of a game and not even acknowledge that there were previous ones.  For some players, it will be helpful to see "oh, this is how they've changed it from /my/ edition."
'That's just, like, your opinion, man.'
You are being selfish by saying that in order to understand the game, you should have player or being familiar with older editions, this is the worst thing possible, it close the doors to new players...The mentality of if you want to play D&D you should be "initiated" by other players familiar with the game is long gone and it's something that should not return if the brand want to have any hope to survive.

That's my problem with alot of people on this forum, they want to suicide the brand closing it up for new players just do feed their egos. 

response to the question:



Naaaah. Why should they? Most they should do is offer a conversion booklet.

You are being selfish by saying that in order to understand the game, you should have player or being familiar with older editions, this is the worst thing possible, it close the doors to new players...The mentality of if you want to play D&D you should be "initiated" by other players familiar with the game is long gone and it's something that should not return if the brand want to have any hope to survive.

That's my problem with alot of people on this forum, they want to suicide the brand closing it up for new players just do feed their egos. 



You're being selfish to say there shouldn't be so much as an optional section of one book explaining how things tie in with the older editions.

There's a HUGE difference between  saying "this domain represents this god from previous editions" and just throwing out the domains with no explanation for previous players. It's just as suicidal for the brand to not provide options for those who are converting to the 5th edition from previous ones, or they just won't do it.
'That's just, like, your opinion, man.'
You are being selfish by saying that in order to understand the game, you should have player or being familiar with older editions, this is the worst thing possible, it close the doors to new players...The mentality of if you want to play D&D you should be "initiated" by other players familiar with the game is long gone and it's something that should not return if the brand want to have any hope to survive.

That's my problem with alot of people on this forum, they want to suicide the brand closing it up for new players just do feed their egos. 



+1
and the mentioning of other editions might be somthing that mainly happens when it comes to the modular aproach.

explainng why the other cosmolegy that you can chose is there for example when it comes to having the 4th edition cosmolegy in the DMG as alternative.

modual X is given as a option becouse it closer resembles how it was in edition A and we found out some people prefer that type of playstyle.
Designer sidebars.
I think that previous editions should be mentioned, similar to how they were in others. I like how the 4th edition books state that it was built on the backs of earlier ones, and listed the names that built that foundation (Gygax, Arneson, Cook, 3e team, etc.). It's simply respect, in my opinion. A page on the history of the game would be great as well. Why ignore the past?

Just roll some dice.

 

RADIO FREE BORDERLANDS:

Explore the new D&D podcast that is a celebration of all eras of the game! Discussing the loves, challenges, topics, ideas, and news of this great hobby in both a contemporary and historical view.

http://radiofreeborderlands.libsyn.com/

You are being selfish by saying that in order to understand the game, you should have player or being familiar with older editions, this is the worst thing possible, it close the doors to new players...The mentality of if you want to play D&D you should be "initiated" by other players familiar with the game is long gone and it's something that should not return if the brand want to have any hope to survive.

That's my problem with alot of people on this forum, they want to suicide the brand closing it up for new players just do feed their egos. 


What? How does mentioning previous editions requires players to be familiar with older editions? Or, better still, how does it "close the doors to new players"? How is having some sort of history of the game selfish? What sort of drug-addled "logic" is that? How do you get from Point A to Point B in any rational and honest way?
Maybe as a foreword in the broadest of terms to explain the rich heritage of D&D and leave it at that. Otherwise, the product will need to stand by itself. That does not remove the possibility of explaining more about a specific version of D&D when creating a feel for an adventure, and or when releasing a specific handbook to emulate a play style.
Navel gazing heavens no
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Maybe as a foreword in the broadest of terms to explain the rich heritage of D&D and leave it at that. Otherwise, the product will need to stand by itself. That does not remove the possibility of explaining more about a specific version of D&D when creating a feel for an adventure, and or when releasing a specific handbook to emulate a play style.



Pretty much this.  I don't think it's really needed unless for a very specific reason.  Let the edition stand by itself without trying to intellectually harken back.  Especially when new players won't know what the heck the book is talking about and even if it is explained probably won't benefit much from it.

"Let's spend an enjoyable evening taking part in epic story."

Sign In to post comments