Community

1.  A GURPS-like approach so you can customize your character to be your character.  Make a handful of class Archetypes (e.g. Fighter, Rogue, Mage, Cleric) with the ability to select powers, feats, proficiencies to specialize my character.   A rogue can become an assassin, ninja or acrobat.  A mage can be a pyromancer, necromancer, illusionist, etc.  A fighter can be a knight in plate, dual-wielder, armsmaster, or barbarian.  A cleric could be a paladin, druid, shaman and so on.

2. If you're going to promote D&D via novels featuring parties of with non-traditional party composition, make the game so that it doesn't require much, if any, encounter customization for non-traditional parties to just walk in and start playing.  Is it really necessary to push the game towards a pre-determined number of characters filling specific party roles (Healer, Tank, Striker, Controller)?

3.  If you're going to continue to sell an online application for the game, how about it working well before the follow-on edition of the game is released?  In other words, why is it that there are multiple free gaming apps yet the Virtual Table is still in beta and arguably has fewer features though I've been paying for the application for over a year?

4. Don't play the silly inflation game (later books with stronger pwers/feats) to try and sucker people into buying more books.  That only works with CCGs.  Your fan base is not buying more books to "keep up," they're buying them for the variety.

5.  4E isn't bad.  Take the time to rebaseline, refine, and balance the game.  Hopefully you were keeping a list of lessons learned while developing it.  If not, pay someone to do it this time.

6.  Think outside the box.  In a previous post someone commented on the D20 being a core to the game.  Does it really have to be?  If its not intuitive what interactions the dice are representing, perhaps the dice are unnecessary or perhaps a more intuitive mechanic could be used with the dice.

7.  Lose the "lets incorporate the latest teen trend as an aspect of the game."  I'm not playing Twilight The Roleplaying Game so I don't need monsters (Lycanthropes and Vampires) as characters.  I'd really hate to see D&D evolve into Harry Potter or someone else's fantasy world.

8.  Another comment on classes.  It seems that many, not necessarily all but probably a majority, enjoy dealing large damage.  Make it so each role, assuming you're going to emphasize roles, can deal significant damage and play their role.  I would eliminate strikers in that case and only have Tanks, Healers, and Controllers.  Each one would have strong attack powers with secondary effects (heal, tank--grab aggro, and control).  This allows everyone to be a striker.  To retain traditional roles for those who want them, allow feats that let them lessen their striker power in favor of additional "role-specific" bonuses ala a Pacifist Cleric.

9. Explain character mechanics more clearly in the Players Handbook by providing a sample character build and how it'd operate in combat.  This would eliminate the "need" for essentials classes.  I.e. "Here's what a sample Cleric would look.  See how we focused his stats on X and Y.  Since those were his primary abilities we chose race N because it provided bonuses to those ability scores.  We chose equipment A to serve as his implement which is necessary for power F.  Also, we selected feat Q to provide a bonus to power F."  Now you wouldn't have to spell everythign out but explaining explicity the special mechanics for a class such as a Ranger's Hunter's Quarry or a Warlock's Curse would help ease people into a game.  Explain basic strategy but leave advanced strategies to be discovered in game sessions.

Those of you suggesting powers be tied to power source:

I think this is an excellent idea for the most part. At the same time, I think there has to be limitations. An attack that takes a bit of acrobatics to do should require a dexterous character, while an attack that requires immense brain power should require a good intelligence. It could make for an interesting system. I'm honestly not against leaving the power system the way it is at all. I like it. It just needs more balance.

The potential problem I see with the system suggested is that instead of characters in a particular class always taking a particular power, every character in a particular power source will take a particular power, and if you're in a particular power source you're always going to want so much of a particular ability score to make sure you can take such and such power.