|
1 year ago ::
Apr 10, 2012 - 10:33AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2007
|
Hey all. Usually we grab questions for the Rule of Three articles from ongoing conversations in the various D&D and RPG communities, but I wanted to try something different. This week I wanted to reach out directly and see if you guys had any questions about design or development for 4E or D&D Next. We can't really tackle questions about the business side of things (ex: Are you going to do something like the OGL for Next?) the future of digital tools or organized play, or specifics about future product releases. So we're sticking to design and development questions. With that in mind, please reply with whatever design and development questions you may have for 4E or D&D Next. It's unlikely I'll be answering any of them here, but I will be adding those that fit into the above criteria into the pool of questions Rodney takes a stab at for the weekly article.
Trevor Kidd
Community Manager
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 10, 2012 - 10:38AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Aug 28, 2005
|
Inspired by some recent conversations:
How much thought is being put into keeping core material as setting-neutral as possible? For example, will we see racial features that are a product of culture, or will racial features instead be those that would remain consistant across the different cultures of different settings? Or maybe something in between where players can select their own racial features and thus opt into or out of culturally inspired ones depending on what's appropriate for the specific character or setting?
Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TMSpeaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 10, 2012 - 10:50AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Nov 19, 2007
|
Will the new rules address modules from all versions? I.e., will a section of the book show how to adjust the stats in (for example) The Village of Hommlet (1979), Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil (2001), and Keep on the Shadowfell (2008) so they can be played under the new rules?
In memory of wrecan and his Unearthed Wrecana.5e should strongly stay away from "I don't like it, so you can't have it either."
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 10, 2012 - 11:02AM
#4
|
|
|
Are other WotC game systems being considered to borrow game elements from? In particular, Star Wars Saga Edition already contains a blend of 3rd and 4th edition ideas -- could we expect to see things like talent trees or the condition track cropping up in D&D Next?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 10, 2012 - 11:10AM
#5
|
|
|
Will 5e be compatible with my 3.x/3.PF books?
Resident Socialist and Undying Troublemaker
Martyr of Section 1, 2 and 4
Original Troll of the House of Trolls
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 10, 2012 - 11:10AM
#6
|
|
|
There's a lot of talk of player capabilities with Next, but nothing much thus far has been said about monsters. What directions are monsters taking at this stage in the design process, and what sort of iconic monsters can we expect to see get touched upon in the first MM for the edition?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 10, 2012 - 11:16AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Feb 12, 2009
|
Inspired by some recent conversations:
How much thought is being put into keeping core material as setting-neutral as possible? For example, will we see racial features that are a product of culture, or will racial features instead be those that would remain consistant across the different cultures of different settings? Or maybe something in between where players can select their own racial features and thus opt into or out or culturally inspired ones depending on what's appropriate for the specific character or setting?
Just quoting because my question is related. Are there even going to be racial ability modifiers? Or are the races going to be defined by Racial Traits like the 3.5 dwarf racial trait stonecunning or the 4e teifling's infernal wrath or a Drow's ability to use darkness? If there are racial ability modifiers are there going to be bonuses and negatives? I think the over all question here is how are the races going to differ with each other? Even if there isn't a really hammered down version of the races can we get some insight on whats going on for ideas in this area and what it's looking like to the developers?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 10, 2012 - 11:21AM
#8
|
|
|
I've got a pile of the old collectable D&D minis and I'm hoping to be able to use them to accurately represent monsters in the next edition as well. Do you expect that monsters will undergo massive changes to appearance and/or size in the new edition?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 10, 2012 - 11:33AM
#9
|
|
|
Inspired by some recent conversations:
How much thought is being put into keeping core material as setting-neutral as possible? For example, will we see racial features that are a product of culture, or will racial features instead be those that would remain consistant across the different cultures of different settings? Or maybe something in between where players can select their own racial features and thus opt into or out or culturally inspired ones depending on what's appropriate for the specific character or setting?
+1 vote for this question being answered. I fully support the idea of keeping cultural features in a separated stat block; that way, each campaign setting can "change" the cultural feature block for each race, whenever apropriate.
Will 5e be compatible with my 3.x/3.PF books?
I believe that has been answered already, even though I do not remember the source: no, they will not be directly compatible (although I think there is always the possibility of a convertion guide).
-------------------------
And now, to my question: If, according to today's Ro3, there will be no session-based time measurement units, then does that mean that we will continue with the in-game day as an unit, or are the designers considering other possibilities (i.e., the adventure as a time measurement unit)?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 10, 2012 - 11:34AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
May 17, 2009
|
Inspired by some recent conversations:
How much thought is being put into keeping core material as setting-neutral as possible? For example, will we see racial features that are a product of culture, or will racial features instead be those that would remain consistant across the different cultures of different settings? Or maybe something in between where players can select their own racial features and thus opt into or out or culturally inspired ones depending on what's appropriate for the specific character or setting?
Another voice for this one.
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.
|
|
|
