Dual 2nd / 3rd edition stuff

[ragnar63]

Should we be aiming as much as possible from now on to be producing supplements that can be used by both the 2nd and 3rd edition genres. Obviously my article on trade for LF8 was only really for 3rd edition as there was a good set of trade rules already for 2nd edition. However a lot of supplements do not have to be rule specific, and so the extra work is lighter. Having said that, even where an article is rule heavy, should we be looking at making it usable by both genres with little extra GM work?

[Herr Arnulfe]

I'd say it depends. If the rules are compartmentalized within the article (e.g. NPC or monster stats in a gazetteer), then there's no reason not to dual stat. There might be scenario balance issues between editions (e.g. are 4 Beastmen equally dangerous in both?), but as long as the writers know both editions well, those types of conversions shouldn't be too difficult.

The more difficult dual-statting assignments would be articles in which rules references are heavily threaded into the paragraph text (e.g. the v2 Wood Elf book). For those types of projects, dual-statting would just make a hash of things IMO.

[Thor]

When asked the question on StS in regard to the Elf Project I always said I was happy for a v3 writer to come on board and contribute to the background and payments to the artists. They could the switch the rules and profiles to the 3rd edition for a v3 release along with the v2 material.

Never had a offer though.