What Element of 4th will be axed for 5th Edition?

353 posts / 0 new
Last post
I have a gut feeling that when 5th edition rolls out, it will be a major reversal of 4th edition. Elements of 4th will be retained but the mechanics will be more in line with 3.5. I guess a better way of putting it- they will grab the 3.5 mechanic rules and advance them further for 5th edition. It can be argue that 4th is a continuation of 3.5. I guess Paizo fans would beg to differ on that account.

So, what Elements of 4th do you think will be nixed for 5th? I'm guessing almost all of it in order to erase the divide between 4th fans and Paizo.

Remember, if 4th is abandoned for 5th, there willnot be a Paizo that can take over for 4th. There's no OGL for 4th. The OGL for 3rd is what powers Paizo. Come out with a non-4th rules edition for 5th & Paizo can be finished.
If I had to pick a single element, it would be healing.  Hopefully as an extensive feat tree that opens up from an initial entry feat allowing anything from a few feats to provide backup healing or approach self-sufficiency to an intensive investment that would let any class settle into the role of party healer at the cost of using their feats to improve or specialize within their chosen class.

 

INSIDE SCOOP, GAMERS: In the new version of D&D, it will no longer be "Edition Wars." It will be "Edition Lair Assault." - dungeonbastard

When 5e arrives, I think D&D will still be WotC's baby (seperate from anything seen under Gygax and TSR for instance).  That's the approach they took with 4e, after all; re-imagined is how I put it.

So, rather than jettison 4e in favor of 3.5 mechanics, I think they'll evolve the 4e system.  What element might be axed though?  I'd say multiclassing.  It's always seemed less eloquent than the rest of the system (to me).  It's more dabble than multiclass.  I wonder if they wanted the hybrid system but didn't have it nailed down in time.
/\ Art
I don't think 5th will resemble 3.5 by any stretch of the imagination.

I suspect that 5th will be more in line with what essentials is.  I suspect that the game will be made even more simple and that skills will either further be consolidated or gotten rid of all together in favor of something easier to track.

I suspect that casting may get looked at a little bit.

I suspect balancing of the tiers will get looked at and a solid matrix of numbers applied down the line.

I suspect defense scores will get consolidated down into one or two.

To see my campaign world visit http://dnd.chrisnye.net My music -> www.myspace.com/Incarna My music videos -> www.youtube.com/Auticusx
What element of 4th Edition will be axed for 5th Edition?



Genuinely hopeful answer:  droolingly moronic, unskilled fighters vs. skill-monkey specialists vs. moderately skilled and skill replicating (thus, skill monkey) ritual casters.  

Seriously, what is up with choosing three out of five allowed skills out of seventeen total possibilities, on top of having stat dependencies that don't really line up well with skill use, and--despite being the stereotypical guard--still not having Perception?


Pessimistic answer of sardonicism:
Balance!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahaha... ha...  aww.
 
Jackonomicon™ It's not always safe for work, but it's great for play. It's my blog, yo.
I'm probably not going to move to a new edition when they go to 5th unless I have to. (i.e. all my friends want to play it and my choice is not play or play 5th).

I have plenty of 4e, 3.5, and haven't tried (though have read through) PF to keep me busy for long enough.

That said, I would appreciate some changes to the skill system. I think they should drop limiting classes to skills altogether and each class should have an equal selection of skills.

Welcome to ZomboniLand - My D&D Blog http://zomboniland.blogspot.com/
My hope is that 5th edition, should it axe any element found in 4th edition, will axe the daily resource limit... leaving behind only at-will, once per encounter, and single use resources.

A secondary hope is that they axe multi-classing.

ATTENTION:  If while reading my post you find yourself thinking "Either this guy is being sarcastic, or he is an idiot," do please assume that I am an idiot. It makes reading your replies more entertaining. If, however, you find yourself hoping that I am not being even remotely serious then you are very likely correct as I find irreverence and being ridiculous to be relaxing.

The forums.

Seriously, I like 4E.  I would like to see them focus a bit on elaborating skills/skill challenges.  I also find some of the races cheesy.  But other than that, smooth sailing.  I don't expect 5E any time soon as it is, so maybe my opinion will change in 3-5 years.

Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept. Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new. Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept. Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept. Default module =/= Core mechanic.

Non-cumulative bonuses of the same type.

Magic items rarity system.

Essentials & AEDU classes will be merged. You will have primary options for each class but will also have access to tons of options if you prefer. In other words, everything will be like essentials paragon paths: here is the recommended option for your warpriest, but you also can choose between these 100 other options.
D&D's 40th anniversary is in 2014.  My bet is that 2014 is the year that 5th edition is released.
To see my campaign world visit http://dnd.chrisnye.net My music -> www.myspace.com/Incarna My music videos -> www.youtube.com/Auticusx
I really hope they don't re-invent the game, 4th edition is a clever mechanic and it was a very good new start for D&D.  I hope they look at the edition objectively and use it as a platform for the next step.  What I hope they don't to is re-design the system from scratch and try to etch in yet another iteration of the same game.


As for what I think will happen.  Personally I think they are going to do just that.  They are going to re-invent the wheel and in 2014 or whenever it ends up coming out we are going to be here comparing 4th and 5th edition in yet another never ending edition war once again splitting the community into two more camps.  God I hope they don't do that.


What I would axe is essentials design philosophy. 

My Blog (The Gamers Think Tank)

"Edition wars like all debates exist because people like debates"

There's no OGL for 4th.


While true, it would not be difficult to make a 4th edition using the d20 OGL, much like OSRIC uses the d20 OGL to replicate 1st edition rules.

So when 5th rolls around, it's quite likely that someone will come up with a d20 version of 4e.  You'd just have to come up with your own names for powers, classes and creatures that aren't in the OGL, and formats for stat blocks.
i only hope 5th ed goes in one of two directions

1) closer to the Gamma World release: quick to learn, quick to setup and overall a stable foundation to hang whatever fluff you want on top of it. 

i like the mix & match aspect of the half-classes (pretty much every PC is a hybrid), i like that it's effectively an encounter-based designed system and generally rules-light. 

2) a whole new system. scrap the current one and rebuild from the ground up while remembering the lessons learned from previous editions. if they don't go the Gamma World route, i really hope they do something entirely different.  

 
3rd ed SRD, character sheets, errata & free modules 4th ed test drive - modules, starter rules, premade characters and character builder & character sheet, errata Free maps and portraits, dice, printable graph paper, campaign managing website, image manipulation program + token maker & zone markers

"All right, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back. GET MAD! I DON'T WANT YOUR **** LEMONS! WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THESE?! DEMAND TO SEE LIFE'S MANAGER! Make life RUE the day it thought it could give CAVE JOHNSON LEMONS! DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?! I'M THE MAN WHO'S GONNA BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN! WITH THE LEMONS! I'm gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that's gonna BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!" -Cave Johnson, Portal 2
Please remove

1. Healing Surges
2. The concept of Roles.
3. Decouple the powers from the classes.
4. Allow rituals to be cast during combat.
5. All WoW inspired brain farts. 

I think the big complaint I have with 4e and even 3.5 is the lack of optional rules.    If 5e was a system that could be played in simulationist or gamist style everyone would be happy.

Keep the core of the system simple and allow gamers to use the optional rules they want.    Healing Surges could be an optional rule and so could critical hits.     







First off, 5E won't be more like 3.5E. If anything, it'll be more like 1E/2E than it will be like 3E.

That being said, I think they'll streamline things and quicken the resolution of combat. 4E combat is great, but it takes too long. I think they'll do something different with magic items. I don't think it's possible to go back to how things were, not with the philosophy(introduced in 3E) that magic items are something players should have a say about, but they'll change magic items into something completely new. I also think they'll go back to a more literary style for the game books. A significant portion of the RPG community reads game books but doesn't play, or read game books as recreation in and of itself, and abandoning them was a mistake.
...whatever
Please remove

1. Healing Surges
2. The concept of Roles.
3. Decouple the powers from the classes.
4. Allow rituals to be cast during combat.
5. All WoW inspired brain farts. 

I think the big complaint I have with 4e and even 3.5 is the lack of optional rules.    If 5e was a system that could be played in simulationist or gamist style everyone would be happy.

Keep the core of the system simple and allow gamers to use the optional rules they want.    Healing Surges could be an optional rule and so could critical hits.

Actually they already released about 4 games you'll really enjoy:

OD&D
Basic D&D
AD&D
AD&D 2nd Edition

Actually, no, all of those had roles, powers linked to classes, and "WoW inspired brain farts" despite predating the game.

You may also enjoy:

1.  Death-spiral mechanics, shoving one player into a role they don't enjoy, three players out of five being irrelevant to the story, and he fourth being relevant only as a "genuinely useful sidekick" to the fifth.
2.  Players attempting to shoehorn the system into self-made roles anyway.
3.  Aimless, unbalanceable design leading to a plethora of trap options and overbalanced idiocy.
4.  More unbalanced design leading to specific concepts (Magic Should Be Special! ™ ) being able to replicate and replace any players not magical in nature.
5.  No RPG game created in the past 30 years, as many "WoW inspired brain farts" are actually concepts stolen from much older designs, and (only occasionally) refined by application of game engineering and game theory, legitimate fields of study.
Jackonomicon™ It's not always safe for work, but it's great for play. It's my blog, yo.
I really hope they don't re-invent the game, 4th edition is a clever mechanic and it was a very good new start for D&D. 

I am doing a lot of programming with 4E right now, and I have to say, it is VERY elegant.

Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept. Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new. Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept. Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept. Default module =/= Core mechanic.

Please remove

1. Healing Surges
2. The concept of Roles.
3. Decouple the powers from the classes.
4. Allow rituals to be cast during combat.
5. All WoW inspired brain farts. 

I think the big complaint I have with 4e and even 3.5 is the lack of optional rules.    If 5e was a system that could be played in simulationist or gamist style everyone would be happy.

Keep the core of the system simple and allow gamers to use the optional rules they want.    Healing Surges could be an optional rule and so could critical hits.     












Where to start...

1. So we should go back to having to go back to town because characters have no HP resources to keep going, force one player at each table to be the party's healing slave and/or sucking on the heal stick(3E's wand of CLW)?

2,3 The day D&D becomes a fully modular classless system is the day D&D dies.

4. This creates a system of haves and have nots between creative players and the rest of us. It's much better to just keep combat and non-combat separate.
5. This doesn't even deserve a response.
...whatever
To hit rolls.

They suck.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

My hope is that 5th edition, should it axe any element found in 4th edition, will axe the daily resource limit... leaving behind only at-will, once per encounter, and single use resources.

A secondary hope is that they axe multi-classing.



Agreed. And I want to see them axe multi-classing by axing classes. Have a core character, with templates you can select for skill/power sets. Want to be a good mage, focus on magic templates, want to be a fighter, focus on warrior templates, etc.

Also, fighter/martial types get talent trees instead of powers.

i only hope 5th ed goes in one of two directions

1) closer to the Gamma World release: quick to learn, quick to setup and overall a stable foundation to hang whatever fluff you want on top of it. 

i like the mix & match aspect of the half-classes (pretty much every PC is a hybrid), i like that it's effectively an encounter-based designed system and generally rules-light. 
 



That would also make me happy. Gamma World proved you don't need feats for D&D to work.
No one wins in the Edition Wars. The whole hobby loses. Wizards did not lose me as a DDI subscriber with the Online CB, they lost me long before that. And I have let my Herald Level GM Status lapse after 8 years. Wizards lack of support and the Edition Wars Trolls that are poorly moderated just managed to take all the fun out of public events. ~~ KT

1. Healing Surges
2. The concept of Roles.
3. Decouple the powers from the classes.
4. Allow rituals to be cast during combat.
5. All WoW inspired brain farts. 



a few notes:

-Roles were initial to the creation of D&D. D&D itself was based off a wargame, where each piece had it's role (!) to play, where the fighters were refluffed soldiers, mages were artillery, priests were medics/supply units and thieves were scouts.

having preset roles, IMO is the definition and one of the main strengths of a class-based game as opposed to something like WoD or GURPS where you're classless.

-not too sure what decoupling powers from classes would achieve since powers are part and parcel to defining what a class can do. sounds like you'll be happier playing a classless game then one with classes.

-rituals take a while because otherwise we would have the old issue of "oh, look a [problem]!" *snaps fingers* "problem, GM? /trollface.jpg"

casters in previous editions had way too much easy access to instant bypass spells, so they separated them with the combat applicable powers and the non-combat, multi-use/versatile rituals, then opened up the latter so anyone could use them with training. adding a lengthier time means that you can't just snap your fingers and bypass what is supposed to be an obstacle.

-what the heck is a "WoW-inspired brainfart" anyways? is it worse then 3rd ed's "diablo-inspired brainfarts" people were complaining about during it's initial release? 

if you can't even give a single example of whatever a "brainfart" is, don't bring it up. if i can learn to actually state what my problems with an edition are in my 2nd language, you can do the same. if you can't do that, don't bring it up until you can.
3rd ed SRD, character sheets, errata & free modules 4th ed test drive - modules, starter rules, premade characters and character builder & character sheet, errata Free maps and portraits, dice, printable graph paper, campaign managing website, image manipulation program + token maker & zone markers

"All right, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back. GET MAD! I DON'T WANT YOUR **** LEMONS! WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THESE?! DEMAND TO SEE LIFE'S MANAGER! Make life RUE the day it thought it could give CAVE JOHNSON LEMONS! DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?! I'M THE MAN WHO'S GONNA BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN! WITH THE LEMONS! I'm gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that's gonna BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!" -Cave Johnson, Portal 2
I'm probably the only person in the world that thinks this, but my only problem with 4E is the way power scales as you level.

Enhancement bonuses are dumb. NAD scaling is dumb. Ability score scaling is dumb. Event the gold economy doesn't make sense.

At some point, as a fighter, you should be able to be strong enough and gain more from getting smarter. But such is not the case.
Kev's right.  Let's get rid of character names, too ... I mean, WoW characters have names, and there can't be any similarity between the two or people with ragequit.  Oh, and stats, we can't have ability scores, WoW has ability scores.  And random determination of task resolution, there's random chance involved in Wow.  Oh, and different fantasy races ... and epic quests ... and monster battles!  Oh, man, D&D stole so many things from WoW!  This calls for a complete overhaul!

So, the 5e PHB will have one page:
"How to play:  Look at the DM, and say 'I win!', and if he says 'Nu-uh!' you say 'Uh-huh!'

And the 5e DMG will have one page:
"How to play: "When the player says 'I win!', look back and say 'Nu-uh!'"
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
but Salla, that's totally broken! there is no rules to determine what to do after the player says "uh-huh!" in response to your "Nu-uh!"
3rd ed SRD, character sheets, errata & free modules 4th ed test drive - modules, starter rules, premade characters and character builder & character sheet, errata Free maps and portraits, dice, printable graph paper, campaign managing website, image manipulation program + token maker & zone markers

"All right, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back. GET MAD! I DON'T WANT YOUR **** LEMONS! WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THESE?! DEMAND TO SEE LIFE'S MANAGER! Make life RUE the day it thought it could give CAVE JOHNSON LEMONS! DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?! I'M THE MAN WHO'S GONNA BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN! WITH THE LEMONS! I'm gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that's gonna BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!" -Cave Johnson, Portal 2
My hope is that 5th edition, should it axe any element found in 4th edition, will axe the daily resource limit... leaving behind only at-will, once per encounter, and single use resources.

A secondary hope is that they axe multi-classing.



Agreed. And I want to see them axe multi-classing by axing classes. Have a core character, with templates you can select for skill/power sets. Want to be a good mage, focus on magic templates, want to be a fighter, focus on warrior templates, etc.

Also, fighter/martial types get talent trees instead of powers.


Classes are the one thing that I would be likely to nostalgia-quit over the removal of.

I play many, many different RPGs - each one has it's own style, it's own feel, and it's own flaws.

D&D has levels and classes - that's what makes it different than playing Basic Roleplaying in a fantasy setting, Savage Worlds with the Fantasy Companion, or even Big Eyes, Small Mouth with a fantasy setting.

A classless game can be good, mind you, but if D&D tried to go classless it would have to be the absolute best written classless RPG of all time in order for me to feel like it was worth buying into - I've already got classless fantasy RPGs, I don't need another just because it has the D&D name on it.

...and I doubt that D&D going classless would go well, considering that there are already numerous extremely solid classless fantasy RPGs that have been doing it longer (giving them the experience needed to be "better that just good")

ATTENTION:  If while reading my post you find yourself thinking "Either this guy is being sarcastic, or he is an idiot," do please assume that I am an idiot. It makes reading your replies more entertaining. If, however, you find yourself hoping that I am not being even remotely serious then you are very likely correct as I find irreverence and being ridiculous to be relaxing.

WoW inspired brain farts include (just a few)

1. "Elite" and "Solo" Monsters.
2.  Both games do their best not to let anything permanently bad happen to you or your equipment.
3.  Both games encourage "builds".  
4.  In both games if you haven't gone for the "optimal" build path then you are an idiot noob who doesn't know how to play.



Feats could be removed from D&D and blended into class progression. A level 2 Fighter could get to add 5 extra hit points, at level 3 he gets a +1 to damage, etc, etc, etc. I like feats so I am not sure how I feel about this.

A classless D&D? Is D&D ready for a classless system? Is it wise to go that route? I'm not opposed to it but, to me, classes have always been a part of D&D. I don't have experience with other RPGs, so I'm not really able to judge a classless system right off.
A classless D&D? Is D&D ready for a classless system? Is it wise to go that route? I'm not opposed to it but, to me, classes have always been a part of D&D. I don't have experience with other RPGs, so I'm not really able to judge a classless system right off.


I would not be a fan of D&D going classless.  I see only a handful of sacred cows in D&D that should never be killed:

  1. Classes (what they are or do is malleable, but their existence must remain)

  2. Hit points

  3. Humans, Elves, Dwarves, and Halflings

  4. The presence of dragons in the core world

  5. The presence of dungeons in the core world.

I think everything else is up for grabs.  I don't expect any continuity between 4th and 5th edition, though I also don't mind if there is continuity.
WoW inspired brain farts include (just a few)

1. "Elite" and "Solo" Monsters.



Prior editions had them, too. They may not have been clearly labeled, but they were there (Any dragon, high level demons / devils, Liches, Vampire Lords, etc.)

2.  Both games do their best not to let anything permanently bad happen to you or your equipment.



Previous editions had this, too. This trend began at the end of 2nd Ed, and ran all the way through 3.x. The designers realized that people wanted to become attached to their characters, so they made it easier to come back from the dead and harder to permanently maim or invalidate your character.

3.  Both games encourage "builds".



Funny, I remember a whole bunch of "builds" being bandied about during 3.x. Kits did this on a more limited basis in 2nd Edition.

4.  In both games if you haven't gone for the "optimal" build path then you are an idiot noob who doesn't know how to play.



Sounds like a personal problem to me. This perception can also be laid upon any character who chooses a non-optimal Prestige Class in 3.x, or who refuses to dabble in the caster classes (or, god forbid, decides to play the one class all the way to level 20). Char Op, as ever, will tell you when you are making a non-optimal choice because one presumably goes into char op with a question about how to become optimal. If you have a non-optimal choice, and want to know how to better develop that choice and have fun with it, Char Dev is the more appropriate place for you.

WoW stole all these "brainfarts" from D&D, not the other way around.

@Wrecan.

Just curious and I agree with you. Why don't you see any continuity between 4th and 5th edition?
WoW inspired brain farts include (just a few)

1. "Elite" and "Solo" Monsters.
2.  Both games do their best not to let anything permanently bad happen to you or your equipment.
3.  Both games encourage "builds".  
4.  In both games if you haven't gone for the "optimal" build path then you are an idiot noob who doesn't know how to play.





1. The idea of the boss monster is as old as D&D. Now, there are just rules that support it in-game instead of adding/removing stuff from an existing monster, making your own or trying to pit the party against a single much higher level monster.
2. Completely Untrue. Read: Rust Monster MM2. Almost everything in the game that destroyed items is still present. Things that damage items are still here. The fear of losing a magic item is still there.
3. This has been in D&D long before WoW. AD&D multi-classing, choosing the right race/class. There was the specialized classes too.
4. Incorrect. Only online does a 'noob build' even come into question. It is very rare that I see a player optimizing a character with no regard to a theme or idea. It is only online that we see 'who can make the best build and all inferior builds are lame.' At the real game table, there really aren't noob builds. Usually every time my players come up to a paragon choice it is something they want to play... not an optimization that make the most by bending rules or getting the best bonuses for what they want to do.

The game should never break free of the class based system. I personally think the class=powers system that is in place right now has been the best thing for it. The encounter-daily thing is very cool too. People who complain about combat taking too long are not optimizing the tools that the game is built on... it is my experience that the people sitting at the table control the speed of combat. Players in my game have around 10 seconds to choose the character attack and roll. I push them on initiative. I do not allow metagaming, the characters can communicate strategy with talking to each other in combat. But any-how that is a different conversation.

They should be so far from 5th. They need to just focus on 4th. People need to relax and play the game.

Hopefully - They will



  • Skill challenges will get a serious revamp and work

  • Minions get a revamp

  • Skills get revamped (like an easier to use 3rd edition.)

  • Hard coded 4 roles. (I'd like 9 or 10, all of which are not mandatory)

  • monster and PCs using different rules

  • +X items

  • The rest of alignment

  • Experience Points

  • +1/2 level and all instances of number bloat simply to have bigger numbers

  • Ditch powers, and go back to the 3.X ability method. X/Day, or you simply add the ability to your basic attacks. 

  • Bring back a seperate system for spells that melee dudes don't use. Make it feel different. (I don't care which is more complex to learn or use. Spells or melee)

  • Stop having races give +X to a stat.

  • I like a level based progression like 3.X is best and strikes me as Iconic DND. I also played the majority of my DND in 3.X, so thats where that comes from.


Realistically - I think they will



  • Rework skill challenges. They still won't work

  • Roles will disappear

  • Monsters will use drastically different rules, to the point where they aren't even released to people. And it is just "Play with the MM monsters or not at all"

  • Be a strong throw back to 2nd edition.

  • +X items will be teased as gone, and then everywhere.

  • Hardcode builds. You can pick sword/board fighter, archer fighter, or two weapon fighter. Pick your race, weapon, armor and stats. Everything else is done for you. This will be promoted as a fix to the awkward "Mid session leveling that takes so long". or "How complicated leveling is". Now you can just look and copy.

  • Also virtual initiatives will still suck.

  • Now I'm getting bitter in this post and will stop. You get the gist.

"In a way, you are worse than Krusk"                               " As usual, Krusk comments with assuredness, but lacks the clarity and awareness of what he's talking about"

"Can't say enough how much I agree with Krusk"        "Wow, thank you very much"

"Your advice is the worst"

@Wrecan. Just curious and I agree with you. Why don't you see any continuity between 4th and 5th edition?


I don't expect to see any continuity between 4th and 5th because, in my opinion, a new edition is an opportinuty to try something completely new.  People who like the design philosophy behind 4th should continue to play 4th.  A new edition should be seized as an opportunity to try radically new mechanics to rolepay a fantasy adventure.

Which isn't to say contuity should not be preserved where the two design philosophies happen to overlap.  But the game design philosophy hsould come first and everything should follow from it.  If there is overlap, so much the better.  If not, vive la différence!
5E will be like [game I hate], because WotC obviously has a personal grudge against me, the most important D&D player, and they are stupid doo-doo heads. It will have [mechanic I hate], because everything new is always bad, and conforms to my nightmare image of the worst-case scenario. The game will clearly die, because I have already prophesized it will be too much like [videogame I hate], and every single player will leave because all of them share my tastes, except for the invisible horde of WotC-controlled zombies who I imagine only buy D&D products because they are the only things that sustain their twisted un-life, and not because they are people with different tastes who happen to like what I don't like, because that is insane.


I don't think any of us will start to really be able to determine what the new edition will look like until 4E winds down, an event none of us will be able to predict until 5E is actually announced, in which case we will hear a chorus of "See? This time, unlike all the other times, I was RIGHT!". My personal hopes are:

- Removal of daily resources. Balancing the game around encounters as the focal point of the game would be a huge improvment IMO. Daily resources are impossible to truely balance, since a "Day" in game can be not only different between groups and campaigns, but within the SAME campaign. I think players and DMs should be able to know what the characters will bring to each fight. It'd make it easier to build encounters, and it would remove a large amount of Nova potential.

- Keep classes and levels. This is one of the things that makes D&D unique in modern P&P RPGs. Most RPGs these days are to one degree or another point-based. Leveling doesn't happen, you just get a new thing when you can afford it with points. Classes don't exist, you just pick whatever. I feel that levels and classes still have a niche, and D&D provides that.

- Improve skills. Skills are boring. They are numbers. I remember reading a recent article on the D&D website where they talk about making improvment in skills translate into more/better uses for the skill rather than just a number increase, and I could get behind that.

- Simplify and clean. D&D has the reputation amongst the RPG community as "Babby's First RPG", and although that title is derogitory, I think simplicity should be something D&D embrasses. Things could be learned from Gamma World in this respect, such as the way your most important ability scores are automaticlly a certain value. Speaking of ability scores, those could be simplified, removing the sacred cow of 3-18, and removing ability score increasing over levels, a mechanic that only damages balance and causes confusion. A better way to term it, though, would be cleaning. Remove the artifacts, remove the confusing wording or unneeded complication of some rules. A cleaner game = a more accessable game.

- Keep what worked. The concept of the Healing Surge value was a fantastic step forward. Basing healing off of a precentage rather than a static dice roll made healing work far better. Removing ability score penalties to races opened up design space to concepts that before would eb laughed at or used as joke builds. Giving Martial characters At-Will powers and Encoutner powers made them more versitile and able to compete with casters, and giving Casters At-Wills made them feel more magical, since they didn't have to eventually pull out a crossbow. They shouldn't be afraid to change things, but they should remember the improvements that 4E made.
EVERY DAY IS HORRIBLE POST DAY ON THE D&D FORUMS. Everything makes me ANGRY (ESPECIALLY you, reader)
WoW inspired brain farts include (just a few)

1. "Elite" and "Solo" Monsters.
2.  Both games do their best not to let anything permanently bad happen to you or your equipment.
3.  Both games encourage "builds".  
4.  In both games if you haven't gone for the "optimal" build path then you are an idiot noob who doesn't know how to play.



1) did you know 3.5 monster/combat engine was built on the foundation of solo monsters? that a single monster of CR X is supposed to be a challenge to a party of 4 level X PCs? 

elites & solos in 4th ed are a byproduct of how the game uses enemies, that their strength is viewed through the eyes of a PC rather then some universal formula. an elite monster is one that is supposed to be a challenge compared to others of it's level, beatable, but tough. a solo is supposed to be a one-man army in itself. 

anytime in film, literature, gaming or whatnot you see a group of heroes face off against the one big monster, that's a solo. the personal guard you took down getting to him are the elites. this is a trope that is older then the game itself

the best fix for solos would be to fix how they interact with the action economy and resource attrition rather then nix the concept entirely.

2) and this is limited to only 4th ed and WoW? randomly losing your gear sucks. i've never been a fan of "realistic" games where a bad dice roll could leave to without a means to defend yourself or reasonably contribute outside. i generally find weapon breakage rules lead to characters who run around with a golf bag full of the same weapon "just in case" they start breaking.

one the only game i've really played that has weapon breakage/wear-n-tear/etc... was pre-4th ed D&D where you had, to use your term, "brainfart" stuff like rust monsters, disenchanter beasts and mordy's disjunction that totally wrecked your gear without ways of getting it back.

the 4th ed rust monster is a pain, but at least you get back the item's value in residuum. in pre 4th, you got bupkiss back and when you consider that some monsters were immune to damage done by a weapon that has a "+" less then X (see 2nd edition and to some extent 3.0 due to the higher DR values, which was rectified to some extent in the 3.5 update) or how some of those gear pieces were nearly required to get your defenses or offenses up to par (belt/hat/boot/glovestat +X, cloak of resist +X, etc... all standard issue gear) losing them without an opportunity to recoup them could easily create a downward spiral where your character is severely underperforming, either due to being unable to hurt the enemy or being affected by effects far more often then normal.

3) sorry to tell you but EVERY rpg i've played in that had anything that resembles stats generally ended up creating builds of sorts. between certain skills being synergistic (like characters who use stealthy skill alongside steal-y skill) or some abilities being simply key to making your chosen archetype work (barbarian type characters who are expected to wade into combat and get hit often taking abilities that let them soak up damage) you'll end up with builds.

builds tend to be easier to identify within class-based games since classes are specific archetypes, so it's easier to pick & chose aspects to focus on, thus creating builds.

but you're deluding yourself to think that it's impossible or unlikely to have builds in any other system. i'm sure if you went on White Wolf's forum and ask them to help you create you a stealthy vampire/werewolf/solar exalted/whatever they could give you a build. same with if you go on the GURPS forum.

4) if you're going to be playing in a game where there is heavy optimization going on, then yes, you are a noob for not optimizing. generally speaking, most groups expect you to optimize to some extent: as long as you can carry your share of the weight & responsibility, you're good to go. more or less then that and you can run into some issues.

i mean, try going anywhere with a 3.5 elven fighter who's picked "toughness" and "endurance" for his starting feats will get you a cockeyed glance by most people who know about the mechanics behind 3rd ed.
3rd ed SRD, character sheets, errata & free modules 4th ed test drive - modules, starter rules, premade characters and character builder & character sheet, errata Free maps and portraits, dice, printable graph paper, campaign managing website, image manipulation program + token maker & zone markers

"All right, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back. GET MAD! I DON'T WANT YOUR **** LEMONS! WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THESE?! DEMAND TO SEE LIFE'S MANAGER! Make life RUE the day it thought it could give CAVE JOHNSON LEMONS! DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?! I'M THE MAN WHO'S GONNA BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN! WITH THE LEMONS! I'm gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that's gonna BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!" -Cave Johnson, Portal 2
Some thoughts on what I see as places to improve

- Less Round 1 Nova (Combat should build to a climax, not climax and then drag out)
-- Remove Daily powers (Keep the Surges though)
- Increased Chance to Hit, or more Options for On Miss, or both
- More (Initial) Dimensions to Characters -- Not added in future books, but there from the start.
-- Themes/Multiclass
-- Backgrounds
-- Race (In Pre-4e discussions, I thought race was going to have just as much impact as class on a character's abilities, sadly they're just modifiers)
-- Skill Utilities
- Higher Options per Level Ratio (ala Dimensions)
- More multi-use/evolving powers (ala Monk Full Forms / Augmented Powers / Hunter Clever Shot)
- Enhancement Bonuses max at +1 allowing for more MAGICAL magic items.
On Essentials: Everyone deserves to play a class they enjoy. Hex Grid UserAndroid UserD&DMapTools
Dungeons & Dragons Compendium
Our House Rules
Index of 4e Errata
Remember, if 4th is abandoned for 5th, there willnot be a Paizo that can take over for 4th.



My money is still on Paizo releasing 5e themselves, under license from Hasbro.
I would love to see them really nailing down the "three pillars" of characters as:


  • Race

  • Class/Subclass/Build

  • Theme->Paragon Path->Epic Destiny 


Where each pillar has its own suite of powers/features/feats that you can choose from at each appropriate level.

If general feats went away, I don't think I'd miss them (assuming there was enough customization room in the "three pillars" above).

I think the pre-canned builds do have a place in the game; I just hope they will leave the door open for the Original 4e lovers to have it their way, too.  (E.g. in the Ranger class description, include the level progression for the "quintessential Elf Archer Woodsman" as well as all the options for other builds; in the Fighter section include the "stereotypical Dwarf Axeman Drunkard"; etc..)

Edit:  Ook!  Also, make inherent bonuses the system default, and really dial back the role of magic items in balancing the game's math.

Returned from hiatus; getting up to speed on 5e rules lawyering.

WoW inspired brain farts include (just a few)

1. "Elite" and "Solo" Monsters.
2.  Both games do their best not to let anything permanently bad happen to you or your equipment.
3.  Both games encourage "builds".  
4.  In both games if you haven't gone for the "optimal" build path then you are an idiot noob who doesn't know how to play.



1) did you know 3.5 monster/combat engine was built on the foundation of solo monsters? that a single monster of CR X is supposed to be a challenge to a party of 4 level X PCs? 

elites & solos in 4th ed are a byproduct of how the game uses enemies, that their strength is viewed through the eyes of a PC rather then some universal formula. an elite monster is one that is supposed to be a challenge compared to others of it's level, beatable, but tough. a solo is supposed to be a one-man army in itself. 

anytime in film, literature, gaming or whatnot you see a group of heroes face off against the one big monster, that's a solo. the personal guard you took down getting to him are the elites. this is a trope that is older then the game itself

the best fix for solos would be to fix how they interact with the action economy and resource attrition rather then nix the concept entirely.

2) and this is limited to only 4th ed and WoW? randomly losing your gear sucks. i've never been a fan of "realistic" games where a bad dice roll could leave to without a means to defend yourself or reasonably contribute outside. i generally find weapon breakage rules lead to characters who run around with a golf bag full of the same weapon "just in case" they start breaking.

one the only game i've really played that has weapon breakage/wear-n-tear/etc... was pre-4th ed D&D where you had, to use your term, "brainfart" stuff like rust monsters, disenchanter beasts and mordy's disjunction that totally wrecked your gear without ways of getting it back.

the 4th ed rust monster is a pain, but at least you get back the item's value in residuum. in pre 4th, you got bupkiss back and when you consider that some monsters were immune to damage done by a weapon that has a "+" less then X (see 2nd edition and to some extent 3.0 due to the higher DR values, which was rectified to some extent in the 3.5 update) or how some of those gear pieces were nearly required to get your defenses or offenses up to par (belt/hat/boot/glovestat +X, cloak of resist +X, etc... all standard issue gear) losing them without an opportunity to recoup them could easily create a downward spiral where your character is severely underperforming, either due to being unable to hurt the enemy or being affected by effects far more often then normal.

3) sorry to tell you but EVERY rpg i've played in that had anything that resembles stats generally ended up creating builds of sorts. between certain skills being synergistic (like characters who use stealthy skill alongside steal-y skill) or some abilities being simply key to making your chosen archetype work (barbarian type characters who are expected to wade into combat and get hit often taking abilities that let them soak up damage) you'll end up with builds.

builds tend to be easier to identify within class-based games since classes are specific archetypes, so it's easier to pick & chose aspects to focus on, thus creating builds.

but you're deluding yourself to think that it's impossible or unlikely to have builds in any other system. i'm sure if you went on White Wolf's forum and ask them to help you create you a stealthy vampire/werewolf/solar exalted/whatever they could give you a build. same with if you go on the GURPS forum.

4) if you're going to be playing in a game where there is heavy optimization going on, then yes, you are a noob for not optimizing. generally speaking, most groups expect you to optimize to some extent: as long as you can carry your share of the weight & responsibility, you're good to go. more or less then that and you can run into some issues.

i mean, try going anywhere with a 3.5 elven fighter who's picked "toughness" and "endurance" for his starting feats will get you a cockeyed glance by most people who know about the mechanics behind 3rd ed.




People play D&D for different reasons and we all like different styles of play.  I'm not going to argue that you're style of gaming is wrong.  I'm only going to say that it isn't my style of play.   That's why I initially said that 5e should present optional rules for each style of play.    All these things that create arguments, like healing surges, death saves, critical hits, spell components, casting failure, hindrances,  the simplified 4e skill system, a complex skill system (like 2e proficiencies), normal weapon immunity, etc... should all be presented as optional rules.     D&D shouldn't ram any of that down people’s necks and expect everyone to like it.    We should have a simple core system (which appeals to the new gamer) and then a number of optional rules that support each play style.   

We need a versatile D&D system.    That way D&D will regain all those players who left and retain those players it acquired with 4e.

Now as for a Classless system, I don't like that at all.   I agree that Classes are a major function of the D&D system and they always have been. For example, if I make a wizard I would like all Arcane powers available to me.    Spider Climb is a power that should be available to any arcane class.    Perhaps they could introduce a sub school and you can have the option of specializing.      For example, if I wanted to make a fighter that specializes in ranged weapons I would just pick powers that are from the ranged martial powers sub group.   


 

Missing with attacks.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

Anyway ... for a serious answer, Experience Points.

Since you can't lose them or spend them, or lose levels in general, XP serves merely as a pacing mechanism.  Give guidelines for appropriate levelling up based on story, or the passage of game sessions, or the like, but eliminate it as an actual advancement mechanism.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.