Sandy's Soapbox
There is cultural micro-evolution-- regional shifts, new rulers arising, new sells discovered. But D&D lacks macroevolution, lacks an enlightenment or a renaissance or a singularity. Or does it?
The first D&D edition (3 tiny books) had the basic character classes of Fighter (fighting-man, technical), Magic User, Cleric, and Elf, Dwarf, and Hobbit. Yes, being an Elf was a character class. (Information extracted from this edition summary and my own poor memory).
Advanced D&D added the concept of alignment, allowed non-humans to choose character classes, revamped the combat system with more detail, and had a myriad of other changes.
2nd Edition reshuffled character classes and rules, altering some (e.g. bards, rangers) and removing others (e.g. assassin, monks). Half-orcs disappeared as a race. The combat rules were altered, as was the organization of magic spells. It also removed demons and devils, and introduced tanar'ri and baatezu as replacements.
3rd edition added character feats, removed level restrictions, added skills. Magic item creation was simplified-- not just in a 'simplier rules' but making the process 'less obscure'. A new type of magic user-- sorcerers-- appeared, while conventional magic users remained as well. Prestige classes arose. The rules for initiative (who goes first when) were altered. Oh, and monks returned.
Finally, 4th edition altered the landscape yet again. Spell casting changed, skill points disappeared in favor of binary skills, saving throws changed, level caps were raised. Warlocks and warlords appeared as character classes, while monks yet against disappeared (only to return later). Multi-classing changed yet again, and the concept of a core class returned. Characters gained healing surges.
People typically take a revisionist stance on each new edition, declaring that the world is and always has used the newer rules. So Tenser the mage (he of Floating Disk and other spell fame) always has a spell that works in the current system, always was presumed to be a magic user under the current rules. Elves have always been elves, with a long a rich culture that has included High elves, Grey elves, and other variants (which change as different editions rewrite their culture). Oh, and elves split into 3 races rather than sub-races.
What if, instead, the new editions were actual cultural and world changing events that fundamentally altered society, race relations, and how young people learned their trade? They're not rulebooks, they're history books.
Under this schema, we have the early days of history, when the idea of being more than just a level 0 villager first arose. People started to pick up skills and learn things like fighting, magic, and cleric-ing. Races were highly segregaged and there will little exchange of culture. Those few non-humans who travelled tended to be seen as outsiders.
In time, though, both the growth of adventuring as a viable set of career options, along with cultural mixing, led to great cultural growth. Larger settlements began to form and different governments and schools of thought arose, leading to the concept of alignments. Combat schools formed and thus combat became more detailed. Kids and parents would argue.
Parent: In my day, we just hit things. Now you're getting all fancy with things. And what's with this 'Dad, you are so lawful good' stuff, in my day people were just people, not this 'alignment' craze you're talking about.
Kid: Yeah, and you thought elves were 2nd class citizens and couldn't be mages.
Over time, some character classes came into fashion ("hey, notice a lot of bards around lately? It must be trendy!") and others faded ("woah, did all the rangers get killed, or is it just unpopular, kind of like mullets?"). The half-orcs were wiped out in a great genocidal purge during the Demon/Tanar'ri War. New schools of magic took over from the old, offering a new schema for learning magic. And gradually the proponents of the 'old ways' died off, and everyone assumed this was how things always had been.
The 'information age' or 3rd wave changes, in comparison, happened slowly. Over time, small changes began to accumulate. Younger adventures began to surpass their teachers and created the concept of feats, much as extreme sports arose in our modern era. New skills were invented, better education and sharing of knowledge led to fewer level restrictions. Magic object creation became codified as information sharing improved. Oh, and monks returned from their self-imposed exile, ready to re-enter a society now willing to accept them.
A fundamental change then happened. Characters began to gain the ability to have healing surges, which fundamentally altered how newer career aspirants accepted risk. Similar to our modern 'gen Y' expectations, this led to a host of other changes. Spell casting, skills, level caps all changed as a new generation threw off the expectations of their elders and set their own course. A small group began looking at warlockery and warlording. Monks, disappointed in the cultural shifts, again went into brief self-imposed exile to reasses their role in society, then returned. Having a core identity and not just being a bundle of skills that your patron could use became important to those newly entering the adventuring landscape.
In each generational shift, parents lament that their kids are too into new-fangled stuff and are neglecting the core values and old ways that made the world what it is today. The kids roll their eyes and set their own course, tweaking and remixing the culture in new ways, until that time when suddenly they are the parents and wondering why their kids are doing all this 'wacky new stuff' and not following the rules they way they used to. Fact is, the rules of life are different for new generations. That's how history rolls. Until next month,Sandy (sandy at rpg.net)
p.s. feel free to pick an era and write your best curmudgeonly "In my day, we didn't ___ or ___" rant in the comments!
