Rest assured that WotC will not be bringing back every little mechanic that has ever graced a D&D tome. We will not be seeing a module for 1e unarmed combat. The designer will be making extremely hard choices about what modules to include and what to not include, most likely based upon their perceived conceptions of the relative popularity of each potential module.
Personally, I'd like to see one of those 'Big, Complicated' systems be a set of rules for an open-table, multi-party, multi-DM, 15 to 50 players playing a hundred or more characters in a persistent campaign world. This would require things like a timekeeping module, aging modules, something to deal with balancing very long-lived or effectively immortal races against shorter lived ones, and domain rules.
Things like aging matter when the campaign concept isn't limited to, to characterize it uncharitably only to make the point, being a short-term solipsistic bubble around 4 or 5 PCs.
I agree with the principle - get the base done properly first.
If I could add an extra to the list - epic levels. See how the system shakes out for at least a year - maybe two and then design from there.
I'm staggered. Not only is Shas agreeing with us, but I'm actually 100% with him on the "let system shake out before you do epic" thing. No offence, Shas, but we don't see eye-to-eye on a lot of things. So, when we agree on something, it probably bears looking into.
Gold is for the mistress, silver for the maid Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade." "Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall, "But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all." -Kipling
Defenders: We ARE the wall!
I've replaced the previous Edition Warring line in my sig with this one, because honestly, everybody needs to work together to make the D&D they like without trampling on somebody else's D&D.
Miss d20 Modern? Take a look at Dias Ex Machina Game's UltraModern 4e!
I'm less concerned with the amount of work WotC designers have to do than I am concerned with how much work I have to do as a DM. I'd rather have the designers do the work fleshing out the little stuff than feel like I'm forced to do it myself. Their time might be limited, but my time is even more limited and they're getting paid to work on the game while I'm not.
It's true that they get paid to make the game, and we don't. But that cuts both ways, to a degree. If they make it, we have to pay to get it, but homebrew is free. You, as an individual, don't need to have the time to homebrew all the little details, but the community as a collective does. You have time to post on these boards. That'd be enough to browse a homebrew content section and grab a copy of someone else's stuff.
I'm not saying literally everything needs to be a module or spelled out in the rules, the books can only be so big after all and not every rule would work well as an optional rule module. But basically it's WotC's job to hammer out the rules to make it as easy as possible for me as the DM to hammer out adventures. If as a DM I end up having to work on lots of houserules and tweaks to the game system itself then WotC is not holding up their end of that bargain.
And I'm not saying that WotC should release a broken or incomplete system. But, to use a 4e example, WotC could hold up their end of the bargain even if 5e didn't include rules for Brutal weapons.
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
This thread is fundamentally flawed because it's not addressing any real points.
No one wants them to work on random tiny modules before they finish the core game. Not a lot of people want these sort of things in the PHB.
At some point, they should be added to the system, in a perfect world, through modules. When and by whom are not really things that most people are discussing, and I think everyone would agree that the core should be finished before ANY module is worked on.
The difference between madness and genius is determined only by degrees of success.
The core concept will set the tone for the inclusions that follow.
As I consider the next iteration of D&D, I wonder if the core rules will embrace a deadly game a la AD&D or a forgiving game a la 4th Edition. From there, various concepts can be included or excluded based on relative worth. Level-drain abilities, healing surges, save-or-die effects, aging effects, and the other minutae from the various editions will be weighed, judged, and used or abandoned as befits the core concept.
I don't have a definite desire for the core rules; I just want the game to include enough detail for role-play-heavy games, enough strategy for thoughtful combat, and enough magic and magical effect to maintain a feel for high fantasy. From there, as others have said in this thread, we can homebrew the ideas that are not officially developed.
Level drain. Age-based penalties/bonuses. How a particular weapon works. Minimum starting ages. And many more!
These are all tiny, little things that people want, but might take up half a page or a page. We argue over them for pages and pages and finally agree that they should all be optional modules. I say no. WotC shouldn't publish them at all.
But Pash, you are a mean, close-minded little man, and your opinion is subjective, and you aren't acting in the spirit of 5e, and stop trying to force me to play your way!
Pash, why?
It's simple. The developers have a limited amount of man hours to spend on this game, and they can only put out so many products. Modules will be great for big things, but these small ones? It would be a waste of time and money for everyone involved. The designers ought to include a short section in the DMG that encourages us to make our own modules and that gives us guidelines on doing so and/or converting old rules into 5e. For example, look at level drain again. You might like it, or you might not, but it's a solved puzzle. The devs aren't going to come out with some radical new way of implementing level drain. A level drain module would consist of a rule telling you how long it lasts, a spell for restoring it, and a list of monsters that get the ability. That's a ten minute job for a fan, and we have three editions of examples to go on.
What we need isn't to clog the production schedule with every minor detail. What we need is to remember that we can make modules ourselves, and a solid platform for trading fan made modules. We, as a community, have much lighter limits on man hours and virtual page space, and we have a lot more interest to boot. These boards already have a homebrew section where people can and do trade things, I'm sure it could be made better.
Let's call for that.
Here's the primary reason I disagree with you:
because your list seems (and if I'm wrong, please correct me) to coincide with the rules you don't like.
My first rule is to listen to no one who's arguing for their own side. If you want to argue for 10 things not to be included, 5 of which you think should definitely be included, then I'll consider your idea. Otherwise it's nothing more than rationalizing 'give me what I want and screw everyone else'.
For that same reason I wouldn't listen to me when I say all of those things (excpet maybe starting age) should definitely be included. However, if you give me a great big list and I divided it into 'I like/I don't like', and then compromised a 50/50 list it would be more acceptable.
Another way to do it is through careful polling. Anything polling at less than 10% could probably be left out without a problem. Of course, having watched the polls pretty carefully, almost nothing polls under 10%. But once you get over 10% you're potentially losing a fair amount of consumer base, risking targets.
As for your basic argument that it's entirely economic (meaning all resources, not just $$$) based, have you SEEN the supplement flood that has existed for every edition since 2nd??? I don't think they have a problem putting out lots of material. In fact, going over a lot of it it seems more like they have trouble coming up with good stuff to fill their product line. I can kick out a page of rulebook in 15 minutes, edit it in 15, typeset and pretty it up in 30. That's an hour per page (call a page 2 rules). If you can come up with 80 rules to cut out you'll save a whopping 80 man hours and about $4 publication cost (in-house). It's nothing compared to the investment in a top of the line print run roleplaying game. Not even pocket change.
DISCLAIMER - Everything said by anyone is absolute subjective opinion. There are no objective claims being made by me, or anyone else, unless they overtly state 'The following is an objective claim'. At this point if you choose to be offended by anything I (or anyone else) say the problem is ENTIRELY your own.
WotC won't let us give them money because they won't produce a game we want to play.
I don't know that Pashalik plans to use the complicated modules, and not the minor ones, and thus is disingenously arguing for a rationale of inclusion that caters primarily to his own preferences based on that motive.
I do know that I don't plan to use board-rules, for instance, while I would certainly get a lot of use out of open-table persistent multi-party campaign rules. Both are complicated systems, both have appeared in previous editions, both could use an update and tinkering to fit with the new system.
If Pashalik finds a rationale to press for the inclusion of one big system he does plan to use, while pressing for the exclusion or long-term postponement of big systems he doesn't like, I might be more inclined to view his argument with a cynical eye. Haven't seen that yet, though, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
@Pash: I both agree with you and disagree. I would say that the barometer for whether or not the Devs should tackle an issue as a module isn't how much space it will take up. Instead, I think it comes down to the amount of playtesting required by the rule, regardless of space.
You used level/stat drain and aging as examples that wouldn't take up much space. However that's not totally accurate. If you have a list of monsters that should get level/stat drain, you will need to recalculate their CR/encounter level/whatever becuase of the new offensive power. By that token, aging mechanics are a far different animal.
I like your idea about a cost-free marketplace of homebrew ideas, I just disagree on what needs to be done by the Devs.
so why even play a fighter if you can play the paladin the exact same way behaviorally and get added power to boot. "Paladin" is about accepting better game-enhancing mechanics at the price of more rigid in game behavior.
Really? So it goes something like this?
Fighter: "I want to be a paladin." NPC: "Really?" Fighter: "Yes." NPC: "Very well." Starts reading from a holy book while still in-character "Do you accept having to choose and stick to the lawful good alignment, eventhough neither of us actually knows that it exists or what it is?" Fighter: "I do." NPC: "Do you reject good game balance because you accidentally rolled a high Charisma?" Fighter: "What?" NPC: "I don't know what it means either." Fighter: "Oh. Umm, ok I do." NPC: "In the name of all that is metagamey and broken, accept these better game enhancing mechanics." Fighter: "These what?" NPC: "Just get out there and try to fulfill a million different people's notion of good while not violating and part of any of them."
So the system is designed such that every single hit needs to be described to avoid confusion? Here's a scenario. The players are nudists, everybody in the world are nudists, it's not weird, it's totally normal in this land. They are naked and they fight drakes taking damage throughout, but healing up with surges. Later they meet the guy who raised the drakes.
Part 1: I didn't describe any of the hits. What does he see?
Part 2: Lets say I described the drakes as biting the players, yet they healed up. What does he see?
because your list seems (and if I'm wrong, please correct me) to coincide with the rules you don't like.
My first rule is to listen to no one who's arguing for their own side. If you want to argue for 10 things not to be included, 5 of which you think should definitely be included, then I'll consider your idea. Otherwise it's nothing more than rationalizing 'give me what I want and screw everyone else'.
For that same reason I wouldn't listen to me when I say all of those things (excpet maybe starting age) should definitely be included. However, if you give me a great big list and I divided it into 'I like/I don't like', and then compromised a 50/50 list it would be more acceptable.
Another way to do it is through careful polling. Anything polling at less than 10% could probably be left out without a problem. Of course, having watched the polls pretty carefully, almost nothing polls under 10%. But once you get over 10% you're potentially losing a fair amount of consumer base, risking targets.
To be perfectly honest, I got my examples by skimming the front pages of the Product Speculation and Mechanics boards for thread titles with this thread's first post open in another tab. What did I have, four examples? Four relatively small rules that I like but am willing to make or convert myself in order to see bigger stuff published.
1. Divine Investiture for divine classes. 2. Martial Practices. 3. The Supernal Language. 4. Lycanthropy.
As for your basic argument that it's entirely economic (meaning all resources, not just $$$) based, have you SEEN the supplement flood that has existed for every edition since 2nd??? I don't think they have a problem putting out lots of material. In fact, going over a lot of it it seems more like they have trouble coming up with good stuff to fill their product line. I can kick out a page of rulebook in 15 minutes, edit it in 15, typeset and pretty it up in 30. That's an hour per page (call a page 2 rules). If you can come up with 80 rules to cut out you'll save a whopping 80 man hours and about $4 publication cost (in-house). It's nothing compared to the investment in a top of the line print run roleplaying game. Not even pocket change.
I have seen the supplement flood. The supplement flood that has led to the bloating of two editions in record time and left them putting out a new edition just to sell something again. WotC has seen it, too. They've seen it divide the community, exhaust the buyer's wallets and deplete their goodwill from the community. I rather suspect they'd do well to make 5e last a ot longer than 3e or 4e, and some things the devs have said seem to hint that they see it that way, too. Churning out material at a lightning fast rate doesn't help such a goal, though.
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
