Legends and Lore - Charting the Course for D&D: Your Voice, Your Game

346 posts / 0 new
Last post
looks like everyone w a playtester icon has already been playing this for a while, just acting like nothings happening



Well, to be fair, they're under NDA.
As a small thought - in particular about making .pdfs available.

Nearly everyone has iTunes now. One of the reasons that iTunes had done so well, even in the world of illegal song downloading, is to provide a service that was no available elsewhere - and they kept building upon that capability.

You could buy a CD, for $12+ and get the 11 songs, where you may have only wanted one (possibly two) from a given band.  From there people started to share music, people would share the one or two good songs from a band, while all their B-side garbage got left behind.  Things went downhill from there.

But then here comes a little service like iTunes came in.  It gave people the opportunity to buy the songs they wanted, instantly, for just $0.99.  And it was legal.  People could get that one song from the 1-hit wonder band from the 80s they missed hearing without having to go searching for that one CD that had it, in addition they got the one song - not paying $12+ for a CD they didn't really care about.

As time went on and iPods became iPhones, people now had the ability to get that song instantly, at the moment they wanted it. 

long story short - for WotC to be competitive in this modern age, they need to provide a service that no one else is currently providing, allowing consumers to get the material they want quick and instantly. 

I also feel they should continue to support their previous editions as new ones are relased.  Look at games like Everquest.  Sure they have Everquest 2 out there, and they are working on Everquest Next (which I found funny that WotC used the same term), but they still maintain their old servers for Everquest - sure it's shrunk, but they still make money. 

If WotC could find a way to support every edition of D&D that has been released thus far (even if it's just providing dedicated forums, PDFs for download, and generic fluff useful for any edition) - they would start moving towards providing that service that no other company currently does

Just some ramblings.
Welcome to ZomboniLand - My D&D Blog http://zomboniland.blogspot.com/
I dunno. It's almost like Essentials didn't turn out as planned, and instead of backtracking, they opted for a new edition.



Essentials DIDN'T turn out as planned. The plan with Essentials clearly seems to be the same plan as now - modify the game to make it more appealing to the Pathfinder fan base. Yet as we've already gotten a Pathfinder fan saying, they don't want to come back no matter how much D&D panders to them; they feel burned by WotC and have what they want from Paizo.

So WotC is just showing that it learned the wrong lesson from Essentials - not that Pathfinder players don't WANT to come back, but that somehow if it can just find the right amount of changes, it can somehow magically create a D&D that everyone will want to play.
I for one welcome our 5e overlords, just because I'm curious to see what they'll come up with. I played 4e for two years, than went back to 2e, just because I was tired of some aspects of the latest iterations (feats and grids).

I don't think its impossible to make a modular rule set. Take the fighter:
1st ed. you are a tough guy who can use a sword
2nd ed. same as above, but you also got skills/proficiencies
3rd ed. same as above, but you also got feats
4th ed. same as above, but you also got powers

As how why would WotC make a retro clone of their own franchise, I can tell you that, if they just took any retro clone out there, copied it in its entirety, and put the Dungeons and Dragons name/logo on it, I'dthrow away all my Castles and Crusades books, all my Osric, LL, etc, and play the "official" game.

Im just such a fan-boy, and I don't think I'm the only one. 

My RPG Campaigns

 

I joke that D&D Next is what happens when, A Christmas Carol-like, 3rd & 4th edition's ghosts travel back in time to an evening near the end of AD&D 2E's life, and say "this is what is coming" and so AD&D 2E heads off in a different direction. So, it's like alt-reality AD&D 3rd, maybe?Cam Banks

 

I dunno. It's almost like Essentials didn't turn out as planned, and instead of backtracking, they opted for a new edition.



Essentials DIDN'T turn out as planned. The plan with Essentials clearly seems to be the same plan as now - modify the game to make it more appealing to the Pathfinder fan base. Yet as we've already gotten a Pathfinder fan saying, they don't want to come back no matter how much D&D panders to them; they feel burned by WotC and have what they want from Paizo.

So WotC is just showing that it learned the wrong lesson from Essentials - not that Pathfinder players don't WANT to come back, but that somehow if it can just find the right amount of changes, it can somehow magically create a D&D that everyone will want to play.

I won't say I'll never buy the next edition..or play it.

But yeah...after how they burned 3.5....how they handled 4e over all (and the entire mess it was, enough errata to books that even our groups librarian refused to buy books...as he felt they went obsolete too fast, if you played an up to date game (such as LFR), and yeah errating a book the very weekend of the week it came out was a bit much, their attempt at PDFs..then the failure that was their entire DDI..missed promises everywhere.  Then quitting their entire character building..building a new one from scratch..that is still inferior in most ways to the origional one.  And the attempt at resetting 4e with essentials...which honestly felt like an insult when I found out was an attempt to bring back the crowd that played versions previous to 4e....as it grabbed just the stupidest part (fighters do nothing but melee basic!)...and never attempted to address everything else that made me love previous editions.

And now they try to just dump 4e?

Why would I want to purchase from a company that switches what a single edition is trying to do...and then instead of fixing that edition...dumps all of it, and all of its fans?

If I like the next edition.....whats to say they won't do it all over again?  That is honestly what keeps me away more than anything.
At will powers are one the best things about 4E.  I don't want to play a wizard with a crossbow because I run out of spells after the second round of combat.  You can change a lot of stuff, but a return to full on old school vancian casting means most likely I am not going to play.

Also I really hope they keep similar retraining rules.  That is one of the next favorite things about 4e vs other editions that pretty much no one complains about besides that it breaks immersion for some people.  Don't force me into a choice for the life of my PC if it doesn't work out right.

There are a lot of other things I like about 4E that I assume they are going to keep, but will be very put off if they don't.  No race/class/alignment interaction.  Leaders being able to do things besides heal most rounds.  Point buy and multiple stat bumps.  All classes being at roughly the same power level across time (I know its not perfect in 4E, but its close enough and when it isn't I don't think that its intentional).



I agree with everything in this post.  If Vancian casting comes back, I am outta here.  If alignment starts having mechanical effects, I am outta here.  If they try telling me a dwarf can't be a wizard, I'm outta here.

And if 'wizards rule, fighters drool' comes back, I am WAY outta here.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
The only logical reason I can see to do this would be for a 2014 release as 40th Anniversary Edition. Even then, I would rather see a reprint of the original core books with up to date rules rather than dump the edition that I and other have so vehemently defended for the last 3 1/2 years.

All I have to say is, if this doesn't blow our minds, I think it's financial suicide. It's far too soon for a new edition still. There's still far too much design space open. So, it either needs to be to 4e what 2e was to 1e, or I think we're in for a rocky ride. 


As how why would WotC make a retro clone of their own franchise, I can tell you that, if they just took any retro clone out there, copied it in its entirety, and put the Dungeons and Dragons name/logo on it, I'dthrow away all my Castles and Crusades books, all my Osric, LL, etc, and play the "official" game.

Im just such a fan-boy, and I don't think I'm the only one. 



for every one of you there are probably more than a hundred who will blink then get sardonic about being asked to pay for something freely available or for which they have already paid.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

I'm surprised at such a straight-forward announcement so soon. I didn't realize 5th edition would be churned out so quickly, but I'm at least pleased that we'll have some part in shaping it. As someone that hasn't been pleased with many of the L&L articles, I take it upon myself to warp the potential system to my will, if I can do so.

And anyway, it sounds like I won't have to. They want to make a modular system that appeals to everyone -- how can that be bad for the 4th edition crowd? It hypothetically means that we'll have a system we like in there too. It probably does have the issue of having less officiality; if almost everything is modular about it, what is the standard experience by which in-store gaming measures? Or, does that matter anymore? I suppose it doesn't have to matter as much.

Here's some advice I'd offer for devising the rules, though I think the designers already are whistling to this tune: design for the generic, not for the mechanic. That is, the rules should evoke the genre, rather than just be mechanically distinct. Ideally it's both. One of the things that caused people to associate 4th edition D&D with video games was the disassociation of these new class' mechanics with the old class' mechanics; the genre isn't even "fantasy x" anymore, it's "D&D x." In this new edition, archetypes should evoke all the same traits that previous edition iterations have done. The new sneaky character should as much be potentially the 1st edition Thief as it is the 3rd edition Rogue. And of course, looking to our cultural expectations for the genre is important too for expanding. Swashbucklers should be an option in some fashion, and should be nodding to Pirates of the Carribean, the 3rd edition Swashbuckler class, and all manner of other popular or ancient concepts of swashbucklers. In a way I think the designers have this figured out because of Heroes of the Feywild, which deliberately delves into myths for the fluff of the Feywild. Do that for the whole game and you've found more interest, because there's no better way to entice people to play the game than to say "you can play a character like x," where x is someone from myths or culture that the person would enjoy personifying. And almost everyone would want to briefly emulate one of those.

Also, two basic principles from 4th edition that I think need to stay:
1. Balance. Or, what balance does. Balance allows each player to participate equally in the game and have an equal number of moments in the spotlight, so to speak. This should still be the case. It doesn't actually matter how unbalanced the different elements are so long as everyone feels equally important.
2. Rules clarity. 4th edition did wonders for hammering down rules in a way that there are very few disputes. One of the elements of this that I know for certain should not change is that we do not have to read for rules between fluffy bits of description.

I think the iTunes approach is a good idea. Instead of selling books, the sales structure should be small PDFs or what have you that have only a single mechanical element (a feat, a power, a paragon path, ect.) in them. There may be larger ones that are collections of thematically-unified elements, but never too big. The only way to fight piracy is convenience. Make it as convenient as possible, and there will be less pirating.

Finally, I'm excited to have the chance to participate in something like this. I intend to force my friends to give this a whirl when it's available. I'll try to even take notes about player reactions to new elements or scenarios resulting from new elements, and I'll probably ask them what they think would improve the game (or what is wrong with it at that moment).

Actually one last thing, directed at any Wizards of the Coast employee that may be scanning these posts. Yeah, you. Look up the web series Extra Credits season 3, episode 21: Playtesting. Watch it. Watch it and make it your temple. Convince everyone on staff to do the same. Follow it to the letter, because so far I'm worried that you guys might not be. Nothing personal, but... well, it's in the video. Some people make their projects personal. When you're trying to gather and use playtesting (and use it to the max like you guys appear to be doing), it can't be personal.
I don't use emoticons, and I'm also pretty pleasant. So if I say something that's rude or insulting, it's probably a joke.
I am actually kinda excited about all of this, What im hearing I like, Modularity and open playtesting being the chief things that im liking. 

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

I started playing DnD less than two years ago.  I DMed for the group, so I have all the books in the group (something that never seems to be addressed..the DM tends to spend the most money).  I love Wizards of the Coast, and I love Dungeons and Dragons, but the announcement has me a little uncertain.

I signed up for playtesting of course.

I like that there are plans to incorporate past editions.  This allows people to continue to build on what they have.  A friend of mine has all 3.5 stuff.  I have all 4E stuff.  A new edition would mean that somebody would have to buy the new stuff, and since each of us owns a edition of books, we either need to find another friend, or find a system that can combine things.

I have really enjoyed 4E.  My games have largely turned into exploration, puzzles and roleplaying, as that's what my players want.  They want me to give them books in new languages, doors that they can't open with a key, and in depth NPC's to interact with.  They want to build a story, and for those that say that 4E doesn't allow it, I feel like they are wrong.  One player wanted his wizard to "learn magic unkown to any other", so I introduced him to rituals, and he loves them.  He's found a different niche in the party (we have multiple controllers.  It's a 7 person group), and he still gets the story.  Combat is done for when it makes sense and advances the plot.

I really like Chris Perkins' writing on his campaigns, as well as him DMing for the stars.  I think it really showed a lot of what 4E can be, especially when he writes about his home campaign and has more time.

I never fully read a Legends and Lore article.  They were always kind of dull, in my opinion.  Yes, it is important to know the past, but it's equally as important to build for the future.  "Show, don't tell."  If more time had been spent addressing concerns people had about 4E, maybe other things could've been quelled.  I don't know.

I want to try out the new edition, but I'm still not sold on buying new books, unless my stuff is compatible like they've hinted at.  I also really liked Essentials.

Wizards has always made me happy in the end, so I'm trying to think positive and trust them with this move.

Fear Of The Dark, Fear Of The Dark, I Have A Constant Fear That Something's Always Near; Fear Of The Dark, Fear Of The Dark, I Have A Phobia That Someone's Always There- Iron Maiden Fear of the Dark shall be feared no longer! Let him be praised instead! (Many, many thanks for all your hard work!) - darkwarlock I am Red/Green
I am Red/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both instinctive and emotional. I value my own instincts and desires, and either ignore or crush anything that stands in my way; planning and foresight are unnecessary. At best, I'm determined and fierce; at worst, I'm headstrong and infantile.
Check out my DnD blog! www.artificersintuition.blogspot.com
Can I just ask what WotC did so wrong to 3.5 fans? I mean, was it really them not producing more of the product you wanted that got you so mad at them?

Anyway, I love the philsophy behind it. But, I agree that there is risk that we'll shift into something that we can already get for free somewhere else.
Ask frothsof.  They did the same thing to them that they're doing now to him.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition


I agree with everything in this post.  If Vancian casting comes back, I am outta here.  If alignment starts having mechanical effects, I am outta here.  If they try telling me a dwarf can't be a wizard, I'm outta here.

And if 'wizards rule, fighters drool' comes back, I am WAY outta here.



Would you actually leave completely if Vancian casting comes back as an option?

For example, the Wizard who is a Vancian caster and the Mage who is a 4E Arcanist, both existing in the same rule set.


Rest of this post not specifically addressed to Salla.

I've accepted a while ago that my preferences are very different from the vocal 'next-editon' posters on these boards.  If 5E was a game designed by the General forums, I wouldn't even think about playing it; I'd vomit in disgust after five pages.  That's why I hope they get the modularity done properly, so we can all enjoy the same game, even if we're using different optional rule sets.
The difference between madness and genius is determined only by degrees of success.
Here is a Dropbox link to the picture:

db.tt/A0oNiWO3



As a technical point, Holmes D&D was actually supposed to be a lead in product to AD&D.  Sort of like a AD&D-lite.  Moldvay should be the first box in the "Basic D&D" branch of the family tree.  Holmes should be moved over the centre and be made to connect both from/out of AD&D (1977) & OD&D(1974) and connect into Moldvay (which should also progress from OD&D)

Also, I see 5E as ending up having connection points to a lot of other places on the family tree.  I think it's likely going to be as divergent from 4E as 4E was from 3.5.
Am I the only one who is afraid that we will end up with a fractured system ala Android, meaning that we will have a modular system and that some game materials will not complement some of the blocks or require some of them?

Thats my biggest concern, I'm honest enough to admit that when 5ed will come out I'll probably give it a go but I won't stick with a system that will require me to do homework before the game just to make sure that the advantures and settings I want to use will be compatible with my gaming group.

Having said all that, I think that a new edition with a new publishing module could be a great idea, if only to get rid of the SGL and move back to OGL and coming strong with digital books advantures and settings, I'm done buying dead tree versions of gaming books and I've been dreaming about having the 4e books as an app for my iPad for over a year now (like the rest of my group) how coll would it be to have the new neverwinter campaign setting as an iPad app with an interactive map and on the fly random encounters? Or having the maddness at gradmore Abby as an app with the ability to keep track of all the orcs and having instat initiative track?

IMO, what WotC need to do is to launch a virtual store, that will be open to all 3pp and that will be the hub for all things D&D, so a player could buy the player handbook as an app (for tablet/computer/smartphone/as a PDF) and than brows the store and buy things to add to the player handbook or add for free, so if a new theme was published on Dragon magazine, he could just add it to his book, and if there is a new book with more wizard powers or a new class, they will be added to his book, or let's say that some one is a very good artist that likes to draw D&D characters, they could post their drawing in the store and sell them for free or for a price and those drawings will be added to the players relevant books.

Anyway, my 2 cents.

Warder 

My Ignore List: blacksheepcannibal

lokiare

englishlanguage

verdegris_sage

Polaris

@ankiyavon If vanician was an option, but not in any way required for your mage while still somehow keeping everything relatively balanced and simple that would be fine with me.    But whether you have vancian casting has major consequences, both intended and not intended.

At wills do several major things.  They give casters (and everyone else for that matter) something useful to do each and every round and usually give them a choice of multiple useful things to do.  And this is true at all levels.  No PC I have ever played has felt useless in 4E or run out of things to do.  That is the first edition I can say that for all levels of every PC I have played.  At will spamming might get boring, but that was usually at low levels or with strikers IME and was still better than only having basic attacks.  And you can change at wills to give variety to PCs over time.

Non vancian casting (when combined with healing surges) also lengthen the work day.  One of the biggest not directly mechanical differences between 4E and most previous editions IME is that 4E encouraged a long work day.  There have been multiple times when the DM has almost forced a 4E party I was in to take an extended rest, but the players are ready to keep going because the party is still doing fine.

Vancian is also a lot more bookkeeping for the classes that have it.  One of the strengths of 4E is that you only have to put a little effort into prepping for combat.  Your PC may be a couple pages long, but most of that is text and not a long list of spells you may or may not perpare that day.  I have never used Excel to keep track of things in 4E, but needed it with previous casters.

And slightly related to vancian casting, another thing I hope they keep in the next iteration is making buffs only start working once initiative is rolled.  4E wasn't perfect on this, but I don't want to have the pre fight buffing sessions that vancian casting encouraged since you have so many spell slots and were doing short work days.


I agree with everything in this post.  If Vancian casting comes back, I am outta here.  If alignment starts having mechanical effects, I am outta here.  If they try telling me a dwarf can't be a wizard, I'm outta here.

And if 'wizards rule, fighters drool' comes back, I am WAY outta here.



Would you actually leave completely if Vancian casting comes back as an option?

For example, the Wizard who is a Vancian caster and the Mage who is a 4E Arcanist, both existing in the same rule set.



I would. Why? Because Vancian gives more power to the Wizard, while the Mage is locked into the power format. I disliked when the Bladesinger was given pseudo-vancian, and I'd dislike if Vancian returned altogether.

Why can the Wizard use Fireball 10 times an encounter, when the Mage can use it once? Mechanically, they're the same thing - you could claim the Mage has more 'versatility' - mostly. If you need Fireball 10 times, then the Wizard is actually more versatile by becoming the hammer, and the Mage becomes less effective because his versatility has hampered his ability to be effective in the encounter.

Also, Vancian is a book-keeping nightmare. Arcane powers was a leap ahead. Gone are the days when your character sheet was well... a spellbook. You don't have to track how many pieces of bat crap you have, or if you'll need to buy a bat for your tower to restock. That was part of the charm of AD&D, but you know what? I just want a heroic adventure. Not much is heroic about buying and collecting bat crap.

@FrozenWastes

Yes, I agree with your points. Holmes Blue box seemed to be an odd man out with its five alignments. 5e will likely have lines branching from everywhere.

Thanks for your response.

Shadow Frog: Swords & Wizardry Developer for Frog God Games (froggodgames.org)

Vancian is also a lot more bookkeeping for the classes that have it.  One of the strengths of 4E is that you only have to put a little effort into prepping for combat.  Your PC may be a couple pages long, but most of that is text and not a long list of spells you may or may not perpare that day.  I have never used Excel to keep track of things in 4E, but needed it with previous casters.

I did have to use Excel to do a proper attacks/defenses sheet for one of my 4E characters.

But it was a Fighter|Ranger hybrid. Not a caster.

(So why did I need a spreadsheet? A balanced Str/Dex ranger in an RP-heavy game. So I had magic armor which I sometimes couldn't be wearing; I had magic swords which I sometimes couldn't carry; and I had a bow, throwable daggers, and unarmed strike. Oh, and this was with the old character builder, which couldn't handle the concept that before using your bow you would put away your swords and take out your bow.)
"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose

Actually one last thing, directed at any Wizards of the Coast employee that may be scanning these posts. Yeah, you. Look up the web series Extra Credits season 3, episode 21: Playtesting. Watch it. Watch it and make it your temple. Convince everyone on staff to do the same. Follow it to the letter, because so far I'm worried that you guys might not be. Nothing personal, but... well, it's in the video. Some people make their projects personal. When you're trying to gather and use playtesting (and use it to the max like you guys appear to be doing), it can't be personal.



I'm behind this 100%. I don't agree with everything the EC crew has to say, but being in that industry, I really wish their views were more universally acted on. Moreover, get the people at Hasbro to watch them.
Fire Blog Control, Change, and Chaos: The Elemental Power Source Elemental Heroes Example Classes Xaosmith Exulter Chaos Bringer Director Elemental Heroes: Looking Back - Class and Story Elemental Heroes: Complete Class Beta - The Xaosmith (January 16, 2012) Elemental Heroes: Complete Class Beta - The Harbinger (May 16, 2012) Check out my Elemental Heroes blog series and help me develop four unique elemental classes.
[
Would you actually leave completely if Vancian casting comes back as an option?

For example, the Wizard who is a Vancian caster and the Mage who is a 4E Arcanist, both existing in the same rule set.



As an option, no; it would, however, be an option I would never use and never permit in a game I ran.  So, as an option ... it wouldn't be an option.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
I for one welcome our 5e overlords, just because I'm curious to see what they'll come up with. I played 4e for two years, than went back to 2e, just because I was tired of some aspects of the latest iterations (feats and grids).

I don't think its impossible to make a modular rule set. Take the fighter:
1st ed. you are a tough guy who can use a sword
2nd ed. same as above, but you also got skills/proficiencies
3rd ed. same as above, but you also got feats
4th ed. same as above, but you also got powers

As how why would WotC make a retro clone of their own franchise, I can tell you that, if they just took any retro clone out there, copied it in its entirety, and put the Dungeons and Dragons name/logo on it, I'dthrow away all my Castles and Crusades books, all my Osric, LL, etc, and play the "official" game.

Im just such a fan-boy, and I don't think I'm the only one. 

Can I have your C&C books? ;)

Seriously. I'm a D&D fan-boy too.  I've been ready for a new edition for close to a year now even though I've had nothing but fun with 4E.  Its a great game, but it's just not the same feel I wanted from D&D. It's so hard to explain without getting attacked, but the point is that I've been arguing debating that the world is ready for 5E and I've been shouted down at every turn. Well, now I can honestly say that I'm thrilled. Utterly thrilled.

And as I've said, if D&DGH (D&D Greatest Hits)(or 5E or whatever they call it) still doesn't feel quite right, then I'll just keep playing 4E or (if I can finally get a game going again) Castles & Crusades, which, while also not perfect, is probably the most D&D-ey game I've played in decades. I hope that changes with GH (Greatest Hits) edition. I want nothing more than for the modern supported version of D&D to also be the best and funnest version as I understand it.

After thinking about this for the day, I must say that I am really excited.  I have always made D&D my own through heavy homebrew and now I get to help make it part of the default.  I look forward to the opportunity to champion what I loved about 1e and 4e (never played 2e and 3e).  And I really like the idea of a modular set of rules; because, well, I always played that way anyway.  Anything to make it easier to pick and choose what I want I will support.

Personally, I am less worried about the design and more worried about the implementation.

First: I am neither elated nor enraged by the announcement. I have played 2nd, 3rd, and 4th edition, and I intend to play 5th edition. 

Second: 4th edition is definately my favorite version, moreso after essentials was released. Sadly, they couldn't make people stop playing with pre-E material, which is why essentials may not have met performance expectations.

(second-and-a-halfish, I also dont want to go back to mages that shoot one spell, then which to dagger. Keep at-will powers for non-melee characters)

Third: I'm curious when the final decision to move to a new edition , er sorry, "iteration", was made. Reading the blog posts by Ryan Dancey and the articles by Escapist generally gave the impression that Hasbro told WotC to make 4th ed because D&D was shrinking after the 3.5 update.  Obviously every company wants to make products that its customers want to buy. Did the higher-ups decide that 4th can't be fixed?

(Anyone else remember the trailer for 4th edition? The one with the french guys saying "no, really, we didn't screw up the game... it's still D&D" ?)   

Fourth: Are we finally gonna get a halfway-decent D&D movie to help relaunch the franchise? It worked for Transformers.


  
i hope you dudes like item rarity



I didnt see anything wrong with it.

I dont get your atittude, its like if D&D isnt exactly what you want it to be its the worst thing ever. 

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

An addendum to my earlier advice:

As they go through the process of reviewing the structural design and removing hidden assumptions, they need to make a list of the assumptions they remove. And make sure that this list is prominently posted, with a suitable caption, in every developer's office. 

There should also be a second list of the assumptions they keep. That list should be similarly posted. 

I favor one on each side of the computer screen. 
"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose
Wow!  Come home from work, and BAM, what an announcement to come across.

I could not me happier or more excited about the D&D line! 

Honest effort being put into making a version of D&D that lets me take modular parts inspired from the various editions I have enjoyed over the years in order to create my own perfectomundo version.  Yes please!

Very optimistic!
Wow!  Come home from work, and BAM, what an announcement to come across.

I could not me happier or more excited about the D&D line! 

Honest effort being put into making a version of D&D that lets me take modular parts inspired from the various editions I have enjoyed over the years in order to create my own perfectomundo version.  Yes please!

Very optimistic!

I really, we ALL really hope they however go forward and let the past be the past. 

This is the 2010s now, not the Noughties even anymore. Les temps changent, sang MC Solaar.

I hope they wil NOT dump the fans of 4th ed. 

After thinking about this for the day, I must say that I am really excited.  I have always made D&D my own through heavy homebrew and now I get to help make it part of the default.  I look forward to the opportunity to champion what I loved about 1e and 4e (never played 2e and 3e).  And I really like the idea of a modular set of rules; because, well, I always played that way anyway.  Anything to make it easier to pick and choose what I want I will support.

Personally, I am less worried about the design and more worried about the implementation.


This mirrors a conversation I had on another site. Maybe the concept of what D&D isn't a specific stat or mechanic or subsystem. Maybe the core concept of what D&D is, is really the fact that we all made it our own, and were encouraged to make it our own.  Now, they're building that into the actual ruleset, instead of building the game they THINK we want or think we SHOULD want (and naturally, are wrong about what that is for a large group of gamers), they are designing a game that is structurally built for that very purpose. Talk about a purpose driven design. Best of all, if my idea what D&D "should" be changes, I don't have to wait for a new ruleset, I can just unbundle those optional rules that evoke that feel and take them for a spin. It gets me excited just thinking about it.

Just my two pence:

I'll be happy if I can use the 5th edition online tools for everything that you could find in the books, but fluff (or maybe and fluff). I currently pay a subscription and I hardly ever touch a book for rules, mechanics, monster stats, NPC stats or item stats. I'd like to be able to not buy a 5e PHB, a 5e DMG or a 5e MM. To not require a book to look up a rule or a mechanic, or even learn the system.

I'll swap over to 5th edition, and continue to pay my subscription, for the continual support, updates and access to the compendium and other tools. I'm enjoying 4th edition, but I expect those things to dwindle and eventually disappear. I expect the mechanics of 5th edition to work well, especially with all the playtesting and the wealth of experience going into it, and I expect I'll enjoy it just as much as 4th edition. Like with 4th edition, I can always house rule. The only reason I won't buy into it, is if I'm forced to buy books that will quickly become outdated, to keep up with a multitude of tacked-on mechanics and rules. I don't mind if it's modular, as long as the online tools include them all in a user-friendly and responsive way.

On that note, can we have lore sections, such as those found in the Monster Manual, added to the online tools? Or I'd buy a mini-book of monster lore, anyone?


You guys have spent FAR too much time thrashing on rules systems over the last 8 years and far too little doing good content development for what you have. Look at your competition. It isn't twiddling with new rules systems that will bring success. Good writers, good stories, that's what works. If you think 4e's issue has to do with the rules system I think you've badly missed the boat.


This is exactly it in a nutshell.  The 4e product catalog started out well enough, but has become a jumbled mess.  Make products that people are genuinely excited to buy, make sure they fit together as a cohesive whole and you'll be on to a winner.
Wow!  Come home from work, and BAM, what an announcement to come across.

I could not me happier or more excited about the D&D line! 

Honest effort being put into making a version of D&D that lets me take modular parts inspired from the various editions I have enjoyed over the years in order to create my own perfectomundo version.  Yes please!

Very optimistic!

I really, we ALL really hope they however go forward and let the past be the past. 

This is the 2010s now, not the Noughties even anymore. Les temps changent, sang MC Solaar.

I hope they wil NOT dump the fans of 4th ed. 



All I can say is that I am fan of 4th and have been running campaigns since it was released.  There is a bookshelf loaded with several hundred dollars of 4E product.  When the group gets together next week, they all level up to 6th to prepare to assault the Fire Temple (and that's the real purpose of the game in the first place).

And I don't feel dumped or abandoned or anything of the sort.  Excited about the future!
I'll be happy as long as I get a proper Necromancer in 5e Tongue Out
I am excited about this news. Hopefully they will keep everything I  love about 4e, Powers and tons of options.


If not, i will be happy if they still make the Char/Mon Builder and VT compadable with 4e.
I hope ability scores are an optional module. (Death to ability scores)
I hope ability scores are an optional module. (Death to ability scores)



Could you expand on this?  I have absolutely no idea why you would take that point of view.  Any RPG I've played without ability scores, or with weakely determinative ability scores (call of cthulhu), has felt either too abstract, or too arbitrary, in resolving things that ability scores would normally have been used to resolve, to me.  The lone exception in my experience would be diceless fate based systems, but those don't feel even remotely like DND.
I hope ability scores are an optional module. (Death to ability scores)



Could you expand on this?  I have absolutely no idea why you would take that point of view.  Any RPG I've played without ability scores, or with weakely determinative ability scores (call of cthulhu), has felt either too abstract, or too arbitrary, in resolving things that ability scores would normally have been used to resolve, to me.  The lone exception in my experience would be diceless fate based systems, but those don't feel even remotely like DND.



I'd like to see the removal of the 2 for 1 scale at minimum. Make odd scores matter.
I imagine that the next edition of D&D is gonna be familiar to the current one.  I can't see them going back.  Sure, many longtime fans have (apparently) been lost due to the 're-imagining' of D&D (as I call it ;)).  Still, it's their game now, the game is unique from what it once was.  For those who enjoy earlier versions, options are out there (and not hard to find).  This is my expectation; I'll wait and see what happens though.

As for what I hope to see:   I wanna be able to run interesting encounters without having to rely on a grid (filled with minis, terrain features/hazards).  Such things can still have their place, I'd just prefer if they weren't 'hard-wired' into say powers (which all seem to push, pull, and slide).  In that same vein of thought:  Less condition tracking.

= = =

I expect to see a re-vamped, formalized combination of original 4e and Essentials; not an all-new approach.  I don't see a retro game happening at all (despite some obvious probes in various L&L articles).  I believe they have the game they want to sell.  The trick I think, is finding the audience and getting them on-board.

Edition change is actually an exciting time for me.  4e was the game that took the longest to click with me.  It eventually did of course.  I'm willing then to wait and see what's next.
/\ Art
looks like everyone w a playtester icon has already been playing this for a while, just acting like nothings happening



Not everyone with a playtester icon has played the next edition yet.

I know I have a playtester icon and I can guarantee you that the only things that I have been playtesting have been things labelled for 4E. To the best of my knowledge, up until the initial playtesting with the media in December, there had been *no* playtesting involving people outside of WotC.

I suppose that it would be too much to hope that people actually wait and see some actual play mechanics before pronouncing the doom of the game??

Thought so.
Mudbunny SVCL for DDI Before you post, think of the Monkeysphere