Community

Well, we all see the 5e references on the forums. But I've wondered if there will be one, a new game with enough change to truthfully be called a new edition.

The current trend in the entertainment industry (video games and movies are where I notice it the most) is to take few risks. The result: sequels and reboots to name one trend. Of course it can be pointed out that some of these are very sucessful. I always say that for every Dark Knight, there will be a few Terminator: Salvation (or insert a bad sequal here). Sure, there is some original material out there. But then again, these companies have millions of dollars and if a game or movie flops, it's not the end of the world for them.

I do not believe WotC has that luxury in regards to the D&D franchise.

So that leaves us in interesting territory. Making a truely new edition is a risk with many factors: How many 4e players will convert? Will they be able to attract a part of the fanbase they lost? How many new players can they draw in? How mush of the fanbase would be willing to convert based on brand loyalty alone? OTOH, making a 4e sequel is less risky. You simply "tweak" the previous edition by adding a few improvements, fixing the previous editions flaws. but don't touch the basic formula or make any drastic changes, or slay the new sacred cows.

Although I have no sales figures in front of me, I do believe that WotC is not losing money with 4e. Perhaps not making as much as they would like, but I don't think they're losing any.

Sometimes we see reference to the new edition being a retro-clone, and the general concensus, at least from these forums, is that it would be a step backwards. But previous editions did have some good elements and perhaps there are a few that were more enjoyed by a majority of players, there's nothing wrong with introducing older elements that were sucessful.

WotC could also diversify their portfolio further by creating new IP in new genres using the current system (a la d20 system). Why not make a Sci-Fi setting, but using the same core mechanics this edition uses? Because of the more abstract nature of this edition, I believe it could definitly be done easily. One could always say that by putting effort into a seperate IP, less would be created for D&D itself. I state this as just an idea.

So, what's your take?

Jan 4, 2012 -- 12:38AM, warrl wrote:

Jan 4, 2012 -- 12:30AM, Cyber-Dave wrote:

Jan 4, 2012 -- 12:15AM, Pluisjen wrote:

I personally wouldn't buy something if I already own 90% of it anyway. Unless they really make a new edition, I'm not interested. These books are too expensive to get a new one for every little detail they change.

Same. I want a new edition to be a new game. 

I'll go for that. I won't object to an evolutionary change as opposed to a complete rewrite, but it must be a substantial evolutionary change.

And if I can take a 3.5 book, scrape off the "3." with a razor, and get a 5E book... there are reasons I got rid of my 3.5 books and kept the 4E books.

That brings up an interesting question: What would be considered a substantial evolutionary change? I'm going to make some assumptions about some key elements they might keep:

-- Balance
-- Streamlining
-- Easy to DM
-- co-operative combat

As a thought experiment, what could substantially change while keeping the key elements, or be introduced? I don't consider removal of +X weapons, removal of dailies or adding recharge on them and other elements you sometimes read about substantial. And changing mere fluff isn't going to cut it. Sometimes I can't help but think that this ed. is WotC high point, one of their best. Sure it could use some fixes, but it has a solid core. To compare to other genres, a movie such as Terminator 2, was that franchises high point, and the subsequent movies never really were able to come close to it. Or the sequels to the Fable games. Sometimes I wonder if, like these and many other examples, 4e got the formulae right and anything else it makes would either be viewed as an inferior product or not enough of a change from said formulae.

Now that D&D is going digital, perhaps they can do like video games do: release an expansion, perhaps digital only and much cheaper then buying a brand new edition (well, sometimes). It'll make revenue, fix elements that are deemed flawed, add some new elements, but not deviate too far from the core game.

Jan 3, 2012 -- 11:58PM, MadcatX wrote:

WotC could also diversify their portfolio further by creating new IP in new genres using the current system (a la d20 system). Why not make a Sci-Fi setting, but using the same core mechanics this edition uses? Because of the more abstract nature of this edition, I believe it could definitly be done easily. One could always say that by putting effort into a seperate IP, less would be created for D&D itself. I state this as just an idea.

So, what's your take?

isn't gamma world a sci-fi setting using the D&D rules?