The More Things Change... revisited

Lately, I've been going through the PDFs of Dragon from the old compiliation CD set (containing issues #1-#250). I've mentioned it before, but I still get amused by the similarities between "then" (primarily the 1980's) and now. Many people will argue how heavily different 3.x is compared to previous editions of D&D, but while mechanically the systems are different, attitudes, styles, and opinions really haven't changed in the past 20-25 years. People complain now how every player is trying to play a knock-off of Drizz't or Elminster; back then, people complained that players were ripping off Conan and Gandalf. Nowadays, people claim that the rules are too complicated (especially compared to the far simpler 1E!) and endorse Castles & Crusades or True20 as alternatives; 20 years ago, people were complaining that 1E was too complicated and endorsed playing the boxed D&D line. Today, people lament how there are too many new rules with d20 supplements and books from WotC; but back when Unearthed Arcana came out, there was an uproar among some about how there were now too many new rules and new options for 1E.

As the saying goes, the more things have changed the more they've stayed the same.

Here's another little snippet I found amusing (from Dave Cook talking about Second Edition AD&D around 1987): "Ultimately, there will be people out there who will be playing Version 1.0, Version 1.5, Version 2.0, and probably even Version 2.3 of the AD&D game. Perhaps we should figure out some type of numbering system like that used on computer programs!"