Part VII- Repainting the Wood Elf Force

I now turn back to a army that I haven't worked on in several months, my Wood Elves. As I last left the army it was at the state of adding my converted Wood Elf Dragon Rider. (Part VI described here).

This time around, I've churned out twenty 4th Edition spear-men for my 3rd Edition Wood Elf Force... Obviously they fill out the role of Warrior Kinbands in the 3rd Edition Army list.

Couple of points:

• I went with the 4th Edition range for several reasons, one being cost: the 4th edition range is not that hard to come by and the prices to round them out were fairly cheap. When compared to the 3rd edition elves they were significantly cheaper.
• Availability- Not to hard to find on eBay.the 3rd Edition elves with spears on eBay are bit more and usually in smaller groups. I was able to assemble the unit fairly quickly.
• Most importantly, I like the minis. I'm not sure the reasoning, but I've always liked these pointy ears.

So I started with 12 that I had bought years ago; stripped the old paint off and started at square one. Got eight more off eBay last fall and just got around to painting them. So without further delay the next unit to come off the bench.

As you can see I continued the autumnal feel with the basing. I also continued the green shields with the white swirl pattern to tie them into the rest of the army thus far.

Next up for this army is... I'm not sure. I have another unit of wardancers currently standing at 7 out of 10, and two units of 20 archers formed from metal command/hero minis and miniatures from the plastic Warhammer Fantasy Regiment box set.

The Shortest Print Run in D&D History – And Why I’m Not Golf-Clapping at 4e’s Funeral

So long 4th edition, we hardly knew ya!

To be quite honest, I really don’t care what edition (or game) someone wants to play. 3rd edition D&D? Castles and Crusades? Lamentations of the Flame Princess, or anything in between? It’s not my cup of tea to rain on someone else’s parade. Now if we are talking FATAL then yeah, that goes out the window.

Enter the anti-2e crowd.

Suffice it to say my opinion of them is about as high as a kobold in good standing, which is to say, not much. And now that leaves the abuse that’s sure to come your way. My best defense against these clowns is a good offense.

With that said, I feel a strange kinship with 4th edition D&D fans right now. A four-year print run for the “current edition” of D&D is shockingly short. Wow, the shortest of them all actually. 4th edition has officially taken the mantle of whipping boy.

I’m not going to golf-clap at the funeral in classic grognard style, though. Your game might not have been my game, but I have a good deal of sympathy for you. My best advice: go on the offensive. When grognards tell you your edition sucks, point out the very real flaws of 1st edition AD&D (there are plenty). Don’t let them fool you. Initiative, horrible organization, psionics, and more, there’s plenty of fodder there. And this is from someone who likes 1st Edition very much.

Am I promoting edition wars? Some might see it that way. But I like to point out that most of us 2e folks were generally “live and let live”… until we got online and ran into the rabid neck beards (see definition #6). Then we learned real quick. Want proof? There are people online who actually believe Terrible Trouble at Tragidore is somehow representative of 2nd edition module quality.

Meanwhile, they’ve never laid eyes on the run of Dungeon magazine from issues #18–81, which rank among some of the best modules of all time. Modules like The Iron Orb of the Duergar, The Mud Sorcerer’s Tomb, and Kingdom of the Ghouls are insanely great to name but a few.

If you stay the course for your favored edition, then by all means do so, and don’t let anyone tell you different. Your game is not my game, but I can’t help but feel a kinship. Your edition is now going to be the least supported of them all:

• 0e, Basic, 1st, and 2nd are more or less interchangeable despite what anyone may think.
• 3rd had a mountain of material, and Pathfinder can easily fill the gap.
• That leaves 4th on its own island…

I say this because it looks like 5th edition is (allegedly) going back to its roots. Time will tell there.

In closing its going to be a lonely road, but if it's your course steer it: "Second star to the right... and straight on until morning."

(Yes I know it's from Peter and Wendy.)

Edition Wars Redux: D&D vs. Pathfinder and the Cycle of Schism

VS.

Taking a short break from Warhammer, I wanted to share some thoughts on the current rift brewing between modern Dungeons & Dragons and Pathfinder. Not as a partisan—but as an outsider. I say “outsider” because I’m not really on either side. No one in this fight is on my side, and frankly, I don’t have much skin in the game.

I don’t play either version

Not my cup of tea either...

Pathfinder is, for all intents and purposes, the natural continuation of D&D 3.0/3.5 after Wizards of the Coastpivoted sharply into 4th Edition territory. Paizo wisely stepped in and offered a home for those cast adrift by 4e’s direction. Thanks to the OGL, they could legally build on the previous edition’s bones—a twist of fate that’s nothing short of poetic. And from all accounts, Pathfinder has done very well for itself.

But for many long-time gamers like me, D&D stopped being “our game” long before Pathfinder ever hit the scene. Some folks fell off with the release of 2nd Edition. For me, it was 3rd. I bought the core books, gave them a go, and found them… meh. Then 3.5 dropped not long after. It felt like a video game on paper. Over time, it began to resemble World of Warcraft more than Dungeons & Dragons.

What finally sealed it for me was the creeping prevalence of phrases like “character build” and “optimized path”. If your tabletop RPG revolves around those concepts, you’re either going to attract MMORPG players—or you’re already emulating that structure, consciously or not. That isn’t inherently bad—but it is a far cry from the games many of us grew up with.

Now, this isn’t to say older editions didn’t have powerful characters or min-maxing, but that wasn’t the point. Today, characters are often designed with end-game blueprints in mind. There’s a roadmap to becoming a specific “build.” What you play matters less than what you build. And for me, that’s a shame. Don’t get me started on equipment overload.

Now before anyone places me as an old-school purist; hold up. I’ve played 3.0, 3.5, and enjoyed d20 Star Wars quite a bit (honestly, more than the West End d6 version). I don’t hang out on the Knights & Knaves Alehouse, and I’ve disagreed with my fair share of Dragonsfoot arguments. I’m not anti-WoW or anti-modern gaming. If I had more free time, I’d probably play the hell out of it. I truly believe people should play what they love.

But not everyone feels that way. And that’s where this schism starts to resemble something eerily familiar.

We've Been Here Before...Twice

his whole D&D vs. Pathfinder showdown? It’s basically the 1989 edition rift all over again—but magnified.

Back then, Gary Gygax was forced out of TSR after Lorraine Williams took the reins. When 2nd Edition dropped, it came with the baggage of her reputation. A lot of players rejected it not because of radical rules changes, but because of who was behind it. And to be fair, mechanically, 1st and 2nd Edition aren’t all that different. It was more about the drama behind the scenes than the game it

Sound familiar?

Back then, the fan-base fractured into edition loyalists. Now, we’re seeing a repeat—but this time, it’s companies going head-to-head. Wizards of the Coast vs. Paizo. D&D vs. Pathfinder. And just like last time, lines are being drawn, and sides are being taken.

Except now the stakes are higher. The editions are more divergent. The business models more aggressive. And the player base more fragmented than ever.

Wizards of the Coast pulling a bait and switch?

 

The Market Is Shrinking—and Splintering

Some in the Old School Renaissance like to believe that retro clones and classic games are on the rise. And sure, in a niche sense, they are. But let’s not kid ourselves: the market for any tabletop RPG is smaller than it was in its 1980s heyday. And within that smaller market, we’re seeing further division. Instead of unity, we get micro-communities and echo chambers.

The irony is that D&D, once the 800-pound gorilla of the hobby, now feels more like QuarkXPress circa 2002—slow to adapt, vulnerable to competitors. Could Pathfinder be the InDesign of our hobby, quietly taking over while the original giant stumbles?

It’s possible. Pathfinder is gaining steam. Paizo has momentum. Wizards has the name, but that’s starting to feel like an anchor more than an asset. Worse, Wizards' strategy around “Essentials” and rumored plans for a new edition feel like confusion, not clarity.

If 5th Edition ends up being yet another hard turn from what came before, they risk alienating what's left of their already fractured fan base. And if the goal is just to get people to re-buy books again and again, well… eventually, players notice. 

Same Circus, Different Clowns

At the end of the day, we’ve seen this before. The fan base fractures. The “wars” get fought online. And somewhere in the background, players just want to roll dice and tell stories.

So maybe it’s not a Kid Rock song—but it does feel like déjà vu. Once again, we’re at one of those once-in-a-generation turning points for the hobby. Last time, the split was ideological. This time, it’s corporate. And as usual, the players are caught in the middle. 

As a (mostly) disinterested observer, I’ll keep watching. Neither company is making what I want—but maybe that’s okay. Maybe that’s the lesson here: the industry doesn’t need to serve me anymore. But it does need to decide what kind of game it wants to be—and who it wants to keep around.

Because if things keep splintering like this, there might not be many left.