Customized Complexity
Now we're getting somewhere, some of the design parameters that they're going to be attempting to design to. So one of the stated design goals for 5th edition is a sort of backwards mindset, not compatibility per ce. It's more of a conceptual backwards progression. Being able to pick and choose the level of complexity, then tack on which rules you actually want to use.
I'm not quite buying this being doable, it would take a lot of design, and then you would still run into the issue of some people wanting to use the 4E type of package while others want to go back and use a 2E style package. It seems a little too far reaching, too inclusive, and reactionary to compensate for the exclusionary mindset of 4e.
Good luck
The real question is going to be what type of licensing, IF ANY, is Hasbro going to slap on this. An Open Game License, allowing people to use the system freely, or a GSL, forcing 3rd party publishers to jump through hoops. The OGL was wildly successful, but had issues with inferior work. The GSL had issues with 3rd party publishers not wanting to be forced into the restrictions. Notably, the inability to support both 3.5, 4.0 and Pathfinder with the same line of books.
The real question is going to be what type of licensing, IF ANY, is Hasbro going to slap on this. An Open Game License, allowing people to use the system freely, or a GSL, forcing 3rd party publishers to jump through hoops. The OGL was wildly successful, but had issues with inferior work. The GSL had issues with 3rd party publishers not wanting to be forced into the restrictions. Notably, the inability to support both 3.5, 4.0 and Pathfinder with the same line of books.
No comments:
Post a Comment