The Next Step: 5e Announced

187 posts / 0 new
Last post
So Wizards has announced the next edition here. I recognize that there will be further discussion later when we get some real news, but given the intelligence of this community I will ask,

2cp for your thoughts?
10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
Either this is a joke or your link is messed up.

Bargle wrote:
This is CharOp. We not only assume block-of-tofu monsters, but also block-of-tofu DMs.
 

Zelink wrote:
You're already refluffing, why not refluff to something that doesn't suck?
Fixed, sorry guys. I recognize there is a thread is GenDiscussion, but I figured a lot of people haunt mostly here, and I would curious to hear more focused thoughts.
10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
A bit surprised, I knew it had to be in the works given what the lead time is on a project like that, but I didn't expect it to be announced for awhile yet as I imagine this will hurt sales for 4E. Also odd that it didn't get announced at a major event like GenCon.
This really doesn't belong in CharOp.
The Great Gray Skwid Humblest Mollusk on the Net
So i'm guessing that jumbo thread of feedback we gave them is either not going to be used, or will be used to a minor degree in 5e.
Cynically speaking, we finally have our explanation for why most of the fixes they promised us in 2011 never happened and why content releases seemed so sparse.

Even more cynically speaking, they just guaranteed I won't buy any more 4e books.

Practically speaking, whether I jump on board for 5e will depend largely on LFR and my local group of players.

The content team made a lot of gameplay missteps with Essentials, some of which they corrected in HotFW and some of which they did not. It remains to be seen whether they learned the right lessons and whether and how they'll actually apply the lessons they did learn to 5e. In that regard, I guess it's a good thing that they'll have a playtest period. Ultimately, we can't judge the new edition until we actually see any of it.
I can't go to the link provided at work so I will have to read when I get home.  This makes me glad I sold my 4th stuff back in Augest
So i'm guessing that jumbo thread of feedback we gave them is either not going to be used, or will be used to a minor degree in 5e.



Actually this is the thing I'm most disappointed by.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Yeah, until we get some mechanics, there's nothing to this for CharOp purposes.
Harrying your Prey, the Easy Way: A Hunter's Handbook - the first of what will hopefully be many CharOp efforts on my part. The Blinker - teleport everywhere. An Eladrin Knight/Eldritch Knight. CB != rules source.
Hopefully it gets some CO people to sign up for the playtesting.
The intent was to make the community aware, and a fair number of people don't go beyond this specific forum.
10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
Has anyone seen it officially referred to as 5E anywhere? I didn't notice it in either the WotC or NYT articles, they seem to just refer to it as the next iteration. That leaves open the possibility of it being an incremental update instead of a full new version.  
I have been wondering that when 5e comes if it would be a different beast like 3e and 4e or if it would be more like 1e and 2e where they were very similar and were tweaks of the previous edition to make it more solid.  As we can see from 4e making a brand new monster leads to some growing pains and 4e could certainly be tweaked a bit (though it started off better mechanically than most).
Has anyone seen it officially referred to as 5E anywhere? I didn't notice it in either the WotC or NYT articles, they seem to just refer to it as the next iteration. That leaves open the possibility of it being an incremental update instead of a full new version.  



I think, for marketing purposes, they'll avoid the 5E moniker, though that will almost certainly be how it's referred to by gamers amongst themselves.

This game will, for better or worse, not be an incremental update to 4E. Though very little info is available at present, it seems it's going to be a modular system designed to be "all things to all people". It sounds a bit overly ambitious, but I'll be thrilled if they succeed. (Check the General Forum discussion with its myriad links for a better synopsis).

I feel like 4E still had so much left to offer, and could've had a much longer run had it's launch been better handled. Sigh. What's done is done. 4E has been my favorite edition yet, and I hope I'll be able to say the same about 5E.

At this point, I can't see myself spending any more money on 4E products. It would have to be something extremely appealing, fluff-wise, and only the Eberron Campaign Guide and the Dark Sun Campaign Setting have fit that bill, for me, through the entirety of 4E's run.
We know no mechanics for 5e. This does not belong in the CharOp boards at all.

When playtesting happens--if it is in any way an open playtest--then CharOp might be appropriate. even thenm they aren't finalised rules, so it's really pointless.
We know no mechanics for 5e. This does not belong in the CharOp boards at all.

When playtesting happens--if it is in any way an open playtest--then CharOp might be appropriate. even thenm they aren't finalised rules, so it's really pointless.



Honestly, I'd much rather talk about this on this forum, rather than the guys who want to do away with attack rolls, hp, and combat tactics in future releases. 

An no, I'm not kidding.   There are a significant group that want to return to the 1st and 2nd edition style of gaming or think something like an Amber system would be more advantageous. 
For at least one of them having "pull, push and slide" as three distinct things is too complicated.  He thought we needed more imagination.

I dunno, I can imagine "pull, push, slide" pretty well.  Not sure why he can't.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Who is going to DDXP and playing the preview? I think preview players will have to sign an NDA, so the amount one can say after the fact will be limited. That being said, what will you think about when you sit down at the table, from the CharOp perspective?
I killed Aleena.
So i'm guessing that jumbo thread of feedback we gave them is either not going to be used, or will be used to a minor degree in 5e.

This.

It's kind of sad how little attention WOTC pay to the numbers wonks that have really dissected and analyzed every aspect of their game.

It'd be like politicians ignoring the pollsters, or sports coaches not looking at the stats for their players.
So i'm guessing that jumbo thread of feedback we gave them is either not going to be used, or will be used to a minor degree in 5e.

This.

It's kind of sad how little attention WOTC pay to the numbers wonks that have really dissected and analyzed every aspect of their game.

It'd be like politicians ignoring the pollsters, or sports coaches not looking at the stats for their players.



That, or they've decided to bag it and start over. Hopefully they'll actually listen to the playtest feedback this time.
I killed Aleena.
This almost makes me want to cry because it's so frustrating. I have not been impressed at all with many of the L&L columns and the direction they seemed to want to take the game. It took quite awhile before 4e had what I consider to be an acceptible amount of variety among classes and races; out of the gate I felt like it was way too limited in scope. Pairing down 5e to be even simpler (a la Essentials classes) is going to leave me with a very bitter taste in my mouth. If I even do play 5e, I don't want it to take a year or so before there are enough choices to provide variety.

As to whether the thread belongs in CharOp, strictly speaking it obviously doesn't. That said I agree with others that would prefer to discuss it among our peers rather than with the General Discussion crowd.  
A note to all who think I am being aggressive or angry- 99% of the time, I do not intend to be. I apologize if you think I am attacking you, odds are very strong that I am not. The only exceptions are when people become extremely uncivil to me, and even then I usually ignore them. I think it is very obvious when I am really mad; if I just seem generally abrasive, it is a reflection of my thought process rather than a state of emotion. I have the greatest respect for those who can debate rationally, even if we come to different conclusions. I am Blue/White
I am Blue/White
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both orderly and rational. I value control, information, and order. I love structure and hierarchy, and will actively use whatever power or knowledge I have to maintain it. At best, I am lawful and insightful; at worst, I am bureaucratic and tyrannical.
So i'm guessing that jumbo thread of feedback we gave them is either not going to be used, or will be used to a minor degree in 5e.

This.

It's kind of sad how little attention WOTC pay to the numbers wonks that have really dissected and analyzed every aspect of their game.

It'd be like politicians ignoring the pollsters, or sports coaches not looking at the stats for their players.



It's not like that. CharOP is not representative of the overall community, and the problem's CharOP finds (and/or deals with) are not problems faced by most of the D&D playing world. 
This is not to say WotC should ignore CharOp, because the people here are often experts at analyzing the mechanical ramifications of crunch. But CharOp doesn't necessarily know what is good or right for D&D. 

Co-author on AoA 2-3 and 4-1.



Honestly, I'd much rather talk about this on this forum, rather than the guys who want to do away with attack rolls, hp, and combat tactics in future releases. 

An no, I'm not kidding.   There are a significant group that want to return to the 1st and 2nd edition style of gaming or think something like an Amber system would be more advantageous. 


Totally this. I'm absolutely disgusted whenever I have to discuss stuff like this with General Discussion's regulars.

And as fruitless as some of you might think it'd be, I'd still say sign up for the playtest. Contary to some people's negativity, WOTC has made errata based on CO findings. Not most of what we've wanted, mind you, but enough of it that they recognize we exist. (Hell, they even rolled back the worst of the Cleric changes after the feedback.)


Honestly, I'd much rather talk about this on this forum, rather than the guys who want to do away with attack rolls, hp, and combat tactics in future releases. 

An no, I'm not kidding.   There are a significant group that want to return to the 1st and 2nd edition style of gaming or think something like an Amber system would be more advantageous. 


Totally this. I'm absolutely disgusted whenever I have to discuss stuff like this with General Discussion's regulars.

And as fruitless as some of you might think it'd be, I'd still say sign up for the playtest. Contary to some people's negativity, WOTC has made errata based on CO findings. Not most of what we've wanted, mind you, but enough of it that they recognize we exist. (Hell, they even rolled back the worst of the Cleric changes after the feedback.)



I signed up, can't hurt.
So i'm guessing that jumbo thread of feedback we gave them is either not going to be used, or will be used to a minor degree in 5e.

This.

It's kind of sad how little attention WOTC pay to the numbers wonks that have really dissected and analyzed every aspect of their game.

It'd be like politicians ignoring the pollsters, or sports coaches not looking at the stats for their players.



It's not like that. CharOP is not representative of the overall community, and the problem's CharOP finds (and/or deals with) are not problems faced by most of the D&D playing world. 
This is not to say WotC should ignore CharOp, because the people here are often experts at analyzing the mechanical ramifications of crunch. But CharOp doesn't necessarily know what is good or right for D&D. 

Maybe there's more to Tebow than what his numbers say, but you still gotta look at the numbers.

CO is great at identifying what is overpowered and underpowered, often with numbers and analysis to back it up. But WOTC doesn't appear to pay much attention to the forum, which I think is a shame.
Litigation's summed it up, as usual. This is a new edition, and this is our chance to add something to it. We might not change anything, but we might also influence the ruleset and create some excellent rules. Whatever happens, we still have to try, and I expect - and I hope - that my fellow CharOppers will join me in the trenches. 4e was our edition, gentlemen. Let's make this new one ours, too, and make sure the grogs don't break it to pieces.
Mountain Cleave Rule: You can have any sort of fun, including broken, silly fun, so long as I get to have that fun too (e. g., if you can warp reality with your spells, I can cleave mountains with my blade).
Absolutely CharOp is great at identifying what is overpowered and underpowered. But a decent portion of what is discussed in CharOp does not come up for the vast majority of people who play D&D. 
But that doesn't mean CharOp is good at game design, or knows what is fun. Just because obscure rule X can combine with obscure features B, K, and O does not mean any of those things are bad or should be removed, and most D&D players won't discover the interaction. 

Co-author on AoA 2-3 and 4-1.

Absolutely CharOp is great at identifying what is overpowered and underpowered. But a decent portion of what is discussed in CharOp does not come up for the vast majority of people who play D&D. 
But that doesn't mean CharOp is good at game design, or knows what is fun. Just because obscure rule X can combine with obscure features B, K, and O does not mean any of those things are bad or should be removed, and most D&D players won't discover the interaction. 



Or, you can fix the problem without touching the pieces. You know, exactly the stuff CharOp does. I'm a game designer myself. I want to help Fifth Edition, and I'll submit very detailed rules analysis and play reports if I can. In fact, I feel like CharOp should set up a bunch of playtests when the rules hit. Read 'em over, get some players, and start trying them out to see how they work. If there's somebody who can find the issues with the new rules and fix them in a timely fashion, it's us. Let's do our job.
Mountain Cleave Rule: You can have any sort of fun, including broken, silly fun, so long as I get to have that fun too (e. g., if you can warp reality with your spells, I can cleave mountains with my blade).
My reaction to the announcement was; "Huh.... well, [expletive]" and an uncomfortable glance at the large pile of 4e books by my bookshelf, followed by a period of not quite knowing what to make of it. I can't really bring myself to be mad or disappointed.

As to whether I'll play 5e... unknown. If there's some degree of backwards compatibility, or the fluff's good, I might pick some of it up, if it stands up on its own merits, maybe. We shall see. I like 4e though.

As it is, though; Given the recent design paths, the L&L columns and seeing some of what's coming, my hopes are not too high.

That said, I added my name to the list. Doesn't hurt to try.
A Beginners Primer to CharOp. Archmage's Ascension - The Wizard's Handbook. Let the Hammer Fall: Dwarf Warpriest/Tactical Warpriest/Indomitable Champion, a Defending Leader. Requiem for Dissent: Cleric/Fighter/Paragon of Victory Melee Leader Ko te manu e kai i te miro, nona te ngahere. Ko te manu e kai i te matauranga e, nano te ao katoa. It's the proliferation of people who think the rules are more important than what the rules are meant to accomplish. - Dedekine


Honestly, I'd much rather talk about this on this forum, rather than the guys who want to do away with attack rolls, hp, and combat tactics in future releases. 

An no, I'm not kidding.   There are a significant group that want to return to the 1st and 2nd edition style of gaming or think something like an Amber system would be more advantageous. 


Totally this. I'm absolutely disgusted whenever I have to discuss stuff like this with General Discussion's regulars.

And as fruitless as some of you might think it'd be, I'd still say sign up for the playtest. Contary to some people's negativity, WOTC has made errata based on CO findings. Not most of what we've wanted, mind you, but enough of it that they recognize we exist. (Hell, they even rolled back the worst of the Cleric changes after the feedback.)



I signed up, can't hurt.



Where exactly do you sign up?



Honestly, I'd much rather talk about this on this forum, rather than the guys who want to do away with attack rolls, hp, and combat tactics in future releases. 

An no, I'm not kidding.   There are a significant group that want to return to the 1st and 2nd edition style of gaming or think something like an Amber system would be more advantageous. 


Totally this. I'm absolutely disgusted whenever I have to discuss stuff like this with General Discussion's regulars.

And as fruitless as some of you might think it'd be, I'd still say sign up for the playtest. Contary to some people's negativity, WOTC has made errata based on CO findings. Not most of what we've wanted, mind you, but enough of it that they recognize we exist. (Hell, they even rolled back the worst of the Cleric changes after the feedback.)



I consider myself a DM and a casual optimizer, not quite the hardcore optimizer as some folks on this board. But I have to admit, I think the threads in this forum are more intelligent and insightful than some of the stuff in other official forums. So I'm glad someone started a thread particular to CharOp. Even if there are no mechanics to discuss, the Charop board still has a player-centric, ZOMG I want killing powa! perspective that should be heard and understood.

The developers should at least hear about how cool Twin Strike is and how a new ranger might seem incomplete without some version of it, or how it sucks that Warlocks need 8 feats to accomplish what weapon users can in 2 feats (if the new system even has feats). I sure plan on giving that type of feedback when I playtest the stuff.

Where exactly do you sign up?




There is a link at the bottom of the article linked in the first post.

Where exactly do you sign up?




There is a link at the bottom of the article linked in the first post.



You mean this one?

community.wizards.com/dndnext

Thats just a community group...or am I missing something? 

Where exactly do you sign up?




There is a link at the bottom of the article linked in the first post.



You mean this one?

community.wizards.com/dndnext

Thats just a community group...or am I missing something? 



Look about an inch up from that link, its the big red button that says "Sign Up Now"

Where exactly do you sign up?




There is a link at the bottom of the article linked in the first post.



You mean this one?

community.wizards.com/dndnext

Thats just a community group...or am I missing something? 



Look about an inch up from that link, its the big red button that says "Sign Up Now"



Oops...I had some proxy settings that were blocking images, thats why I didn't see it. Sorry for the confusion and thanks!

Who is going to DDXP and playing the preview? I think preview players will have to sign an NDA, so the amount one can say after the fact will be limited. That being said, what will you think about when you sit down at the table, from the CharOp perspective?

This may be a different kettle of fish, but I know that when we've had preview material at DDXP in the past, we haven't had to swear the players to secrecy or anything like that.
Honestly, i'm a little irritated they announced this after everyone has bought tickets for events at ddxp.
My pathfinder'er buddies are calling and laughing at me. I think i might have to throttle someone.
Why?

I don't think that this edition change will be as traumatic as the 3.5->4E switch, partially because 4E people who played 4E built a character of acceptance of change, and people who play 3.5 are going to keep playing 3.5 or Pathfinder.

All in all, I think I'll play a lot of 4E even after the edition change, but I want to look at 5E bad.
-
-
-
Also, I signed up for the Playtest thingamajig.