TSR survives (just an idea)

This is just a short idea. What if TSR, the creator of D&D, never went bankrupt and was never purchased by Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro in 1997?

1999 Dungeons & Dragons 6th Edition is published; this edition is some sort of test-bed for the next edition of AD&D
2000 Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition is published using ideas tested in D&D 6e and in the Player Options series of AD&D 2e
2004 Dungeons & Dragons 30th Anniversary Edition is published, a revised edition of D&D 6e
2008 Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition is published
2010 Dungeons & Dragons 7th Edition is published with simplified and fast-pace rules, fans call it the 'off-line MMORPG'
 
Last edited:
A certain lady should be off.

And honestly, maybe Gygax shouldn't be at the helm - he was maybe not too good at the economical, business side of it.
 
There may be some ways of accomplishing this if the trading card/Magic craze either does not occur or peters out. The early-mid 90s did see a proliferation of campaign settings for AD&D and perhaps this diluted things a little.

Keeping the 'Advanced' in Advanced Dungeons and Dragons would be interesting, as would be a 3rd edition that was more of an evolutionary step (such as 1e to 2e) rather than a rather substantive change.
 
The certain lady also made TSR produce multiple Buck Rogers games and modules, which no one wanted, and which did not sell, just because her family owned the rights so she got paid royalties for it.
 
There may be some ways of accomplishing this if the trading card/Magic craze either does not occur or peters out. The early-mid 90s did see a proliferation of campaign settings for AD&D and perhaps this diluted things a little.

Keeping the 'Advanced' in Advanced Dungeons and Dragons would be interesting, as would be a 3rd edition that was more of an evolutionary step (such as 1e to 2e) rather than a rather substantive change.

Actually, it was a major evolution for good. I would never go back to AD&D days.
Games at times have to evolve too.

Keeping Gygax around may have blocked the evolution of the game.
 
I would personally differe on the characterization of the change being good and on the relative merits of 1e/2e vs 3e.

It is a very subjective issue - not to mention a niche one - and my point was that a different process of change would be interesting rather than positive or negative in and of itself. Having a continuation of the S&P changes (whilst they were neither fish nor fowl) is one alternate path that built upon the core mechanics of the game system rather than rebuilt it and turned certain elements on their head.
 
In OTL both D&D 3e and D&D 4e are completely new games with only some connection to D&D and AD&D. The compatibility was lost.
The other mistakes of TSR were the second Buck Rogers RPG (the first used modified AD&D rules and was successful enough to warrant two CRPGs) and most of the RPGs published in the 1990s (Saga, Amazing Engine, Alternity).
 
In OTL both D&D 3e and D&D 4e are completely new games with only some connection to D&D and AD&D. The compatibility was lost.
The other mistakes of TSR were the second Buck Rogers RPG (the first used modified AD&D rules and was successful enough to warrant two CRPGs) and most of the RPGs published in the 1990s (Saga, Amazing Engine, Alternity).

I agree with both points.
The differences between 1e and 2e and D&D were there, but were minor enough to make them easily translatable; the image that springs to my mind is late 16th/early 17th century English and Modern English - different, but easily recognisable enough. 3e to me is a bit more like Early Middle English in comparison.

The dalliances with the like of Buck Rogers and Saga were certainly contributors towards eventual financial problems, given that the general market was not particularly large or majorly profitable in the first place from what I've read. I did like the 'Faerie Queen and Country' supplement for the Amazing Engine, but agree that yet another system was diluting things a bit too far.
 
IMO the problem with Buck Rogers was, that they tried a complete restart with new rules and based on the original stories. The first edition of Buck Rogers had the advantage that the rules were based on AD&D.
Saga however was IMO their biggest mistake. And I did not mean the creation of a whole new RPG. I mean that they used two established worlds for this. Dragonlance had been a successfull AD&D campaign setting and Marvel Super-Heroes was also very popular.
 
In OTL both D&D 3e and D&D 4e are completely new games with only some connection to D&D and AD&D. The compatibility was lost.
The other mistakes of TSR were the second Buck Rogers RPG (the first used modified AD&D rules and was successful enough to warrant two CRPGs) and most of the RPGs published in the 1990s (Saga, Amazing Engine, Alternity).

Even 1e is easy enough to convert to 3rd edition. 4e is another matter entirely.
 
Even 1e is easy enough to convert to 3rd edition. 4e is another matter entirely.
But 3e is not compatible to 1e or 2e. You could still play an original D&D adventure with an AD&D 2e party and have to adjust nearly nothing. But the changes between AD&D 2e and D&D 3e are too great to be compatible.
 
But 3e is not compatible to 1e or 2e. You could still play an original D&D adventure with an AD&D 2e party and have to adjust nearly nothing. But the changes between AD&D 2e and D&D 3e are too great to be compatible.

Nonsense. Just add skills, feats, figure out AC (easy enough to convert if you think about it AC 2 in 2e is AC 18 in 3e) and use 3e for atk bonuses and saves. It takes a little work but simple enough. I have done it myself. 4e is totally incompatible because of its magic system. If they went with a spell point system it might be able to convert but once I saw the system the spell system used for 4e I didn't look any farther.
 
Nonsense. Just add skills, feats, figure out AC (easy enough to convert if you think about it AC 2 in 2e is AC 18 in 3e) and use 3e for atk bonuses and saves. It takes a little work but simple enough. I have done it myself. 4e is totally incompatible because of its magic system. If they went with a spell point system it might be able to convert but once I saw the system the spell system used for 4e I didn't look any farther.
Take a good look at what you have written and you would see that you've already given the reasons why D&D 3e is not compatible (but convertible) with (A)D&D:

  • You have to figure out and add the skills and feats.
  • You have to compute the new ACs (10 - oAC = nAC)
  • You have to convert the THAC0 into the BAB
  • You have to figure out which of the three 3e saves replace which of the five 2e saves
So you have a lot of work to do. If 3e was really compatible then you should not have to do those things.
 
A certain lady should be off.

And honestly, maybe Gygax shouldn't be at the helm - he was maybe not too good at the economical, business side of it.

probably. But just who was around that could have taken the financial helm of TSR and kept it going? Any of TSR's staff at the time?
 
Take a good look at what you have written and you would see that you've already given the reasons why D&D 3e is not compatible (but convertible) with (A)D&D:

  • You have to figure out and add the skills and feats.
  • You have to compute the new ACs (10 - oAC = nAC)
  • You have to convert the THAC0 into the BAB
  • You have to figure out which of the three 3e saves replace which of the five 2e saves
So you have a lot of work to do. If 3e was really compatible then you should not have to do those things.

OK, maybe convertible is a better word but you can't do that with 4e.
 
Top