Well, I can tell you as a DM, what three things I really want to see in Next. Obviously, I want a lot more than three, but let's say these are the three key that'll keep campaigns going and all of us interested.
1) Interesting, diverse, but not too complicated characters that play well. This is very important and pretty encompassing when it comes to character creation and advancement. First, you have to give players an array of options that give them a canvas to create almost anything they want (within reason, of course). I already like what I see out of Next in this regard. I am not necessarily talking about dozens of books with 1000s of mix and match options, just options that are easy to mix and match with classes that can differentiate characters in many ways. Because I want “not too complicated”, I don’t want these to be heavy rules options with a lot of effects to keep track of and variables to monitor. Simple solutions can be easily implemented and still accomplish the feeling of distinguishing. Take Fighter, for example. The 4 different fighting styles are very simple to use, yet each gives a distinct flavor to that character (in fact, one playtest campaign we have going has three fighters in it, each very different in characteristics and roleplay – an archer, a paladin, and a duelist). Play well means everyone has a character they want to play, enjoying playing, and that doesn’t get overshadowed by any others. Characters shouldn’t be carbon copies with different classes, but each should be worth playing in its own right over time.
2) Fast, fun, and smooth running rules. I am telling you that for all the wonderful aspects of tactics you get from a gridded, tightly controlled battlemat, you lose a lot of immersion in roleplaying. I love tactical game. Strategy games. Play them fairly regularly. Have friends who also enjoy them. But that’s what they are. Tactical contests. When the rules require you to think about the rules all the time in order to “win”, you are not roleplaying, you’re playing a strategy game with roleplaying elements. Players not into it get bored quickly as it takes too long between turns. Players into it are thinking about powers, skills, or spells more than “what would/ my character do.” With a faster pace comes more involvement and immersion. Tension and excitement is maintained. Furthermore, the less tactical minded or disinterested in strategy games aren’t lost as the sessions play out more like a good movie. You flow from combat to roleplayed interaction, to group interaction, etc., with ease. Nothing puts the breaks on the roleplay because you have to switch from “character thinking” to “game mechanics thinking.” It took me 2+ years to smooth 4E’s edges out to make it faster paced with more action and less bookkeeping… and it was worth it. But no new game should require so much work.
3) A vast, panoramic world of possibilities. Think about some of the best “world” scenes in movies. That sweeping shot of a rich land of wonder, color, and the unknown. A really fantastic movie with a railroading plot usually leaves me disappointed in the end. The best actors given no freedom of expression taken from scene to scene usually result in boring, predictable outcomes… or at least a feeling of dissatisfaction because you never really saw critical choice points with high tension. D&D should give you a great world of the unknown, letting players and DMs explore it. When Frodo the player looks out over the desolate plains of Mordor, he should see dozens of possibilities, threats, and the unknown… and then get to decide for himself how he’s going to try to traverse it. Even in an adventuring module, it should not be a series of encounters to be followed in a specific order (usually, there are some exceptions that work quite well and logically), but just one place to explore in the vast world the characters _live_ in.
So, in short (ha!), I want to see a good mix of options for players that isn’t unbalancing and is simple enough to play for the new guy, but diverse enough to stir the imagination of the veteran gal. I want rules that don’t get in the way of themselves. Fast play usually equates to more fun and more tension. Ever had to wait 30 minutes in an Instance Queue only to have to slow down after every battle for someone to go AFK? Yeah. Not fun, no matter how exciting the content between. Finally, a rich world (or worlds to choose from preferably) to explore. Not be pushed through, but to have plenty of material to get for it (for the DM without the time) or be inspired to create for (for the DM with the time).
Oh, and I should note that as a DM, the benefit of smooth, simple enough rules is that it’s easy to “wing.” The best campaigns are ones that are easy to run off-the-cuff when things happen that weren’t expected. That’s very hard to do in a rules heavy, hard-to-balance game system without a lot of experience in that system, and time to set something up for it. Some recent editions have suggested making canned encounters ahead of time for the unexpected. That doesn’t work as well as it sounds. One, if it was unexpected, how on earth can you easily prepare for it ahead of time. You’d just be guessing at what might be a good challenge or encounter should players go off the beaten path. And two, you have to keep doing this all along the way. As if my time as DM wasn’t already at a premium. I really don’t want to waste that precious resources trying to stay ahead of the curve for what “might” happen.
With AD&D (which had its flaws, no doubt, but this wasn’t one of them), it was always easy to wing a roleplaying situation, challenge them with some sort of hazard or environment when they go off course, or plop down a handful of grab-bag monsters for an unexpected encounter. The rules and creatures were simple enough and didn’t require rigid encounter constructions to allow this. It made life as a DM easy (much reduced prep time) and players happy (a greater feel of self-determination – they didn’t *have* to follow the yellow brick road).
Wow, I write too much. :P Anyway, some more of my thoughts on the current subject.
You make some wonderful and vivid piints to as why I liked AD&D best. I also think that Next can be a role playing game and still be a roll playing game by meshing a proper (secret mixture mind you) portion of the Classic system with the modern ones. (Both for the roleplay oreinted and the tactically stressed playstyles) I also like the option to play the Game in public in the theater of the mind, and then have clear cut rules for playing on the grid included with terms that translate between both styles of play as to be relevant no matter how what your taste is. I.E. terrain, favorable and unfavorable effects like cover and concealment, distance, Aao's that are simply quantified and applied, and conditions such as weather included. This would make the game universal and recognizable between playstyles. This would do much to unite the various editions players when it came to the understanding of what constituted the D&D experience in play. That is key to having success for the game we all love so much.
Thank you, Brave Sir. I had a great time writing it. (Pats own back over shoulder) I hope folks see the truth glaring at them from within it. UNITY in modularity to effect overall across edition playability. This coupled with recognition even at a glance brings universal collective thought. Truly the game lives in our minds and not just in mechanical diffences of approach. It's also the cognitive link to the human experience- perspective. Shared perspecrtive equals a shared experience with or without a prop. (grins under his thick moustache)
I remember when 3e hit the great and mighty edition wars that went on then. Even still now, I hear a common refrain I heard then.....distaste for all the "Skills" it shoved into the game.
However, while going through a bit of nostalgia the other night while talking to a friend I opened up the spiral notebook I had used to copy down the PHB (was in middle school at the time, played with my best friend, my mom didn't approve of D&D so I hid the fact I played so I could never own a book at that time...so I spent a few days penning all the important info out of the PHB into a notebook).
While doing this, I stopped on the non-weapon proficiencies and then something struck me.
There were 61 non-weapon proficiencies with the smallest amount to choose from being a total of 20 for Priest or Mages.
I believe there were 36 skills to choose from in 3rd edition core...with an understanding that Craft, Profession, Knowledge, and Perform could all spread out to a good bit more.
Still, total skill wise in the core game...it doesn't seem all that bigger
The difference though is that in 3, 3.5, PF, & even 4e, you spend alot of time dealing with your skills. Every Lv you have to allocate pts, re-alocate pts, train/un-train a skill, etc etc etc. And adventures are written (by the company or just the DMs) so as to make using your slills alot important. So you spend more time dwelling on them. Previously? Really only the Thief players had to worry about this attention to skills. Otherwise, once you took a NWP it was static & only came into play in limited ammounts.
Unbounded Rules - Not everything is spelled out which reduces substantially the "go-to-the-book" searching that takes up so much time.
Thac0 - It really was easy and the number on the die was important, not some number over and above 20
Reduced incentive to Min/Max - although it generally went on in places, it was much less widespread and ability score min/maxing didn't give the bonus to everything it does starting with the advent of 3.x
Bounded ability scores - Getting that girdle of storm giant strength usually meant you are the strongest there IS.
Fast Character Generation - Character back-story is what was going on from levels 1-5, a character dies in the 1-5 levels it's quick to regenerate a new one. Characters 6 and up can usually afford or have the means to resurrect.
Non-Tactical Combat - Narrative descriptive combat is much more RP'ing than moving pieces on a grid. The action is more organic to the story and the DM has an ability to make it more exciting for all players. The turn is not spent trying to "board-game" out the most advantageous manner to win the encounter.
"If it's not a conjuration, how did the wizard
con·jure/ˈkänjər/Verb 1. Make (something) appear unexpectedly or seemingly from nowhere as if by magic.
it?" -anon
"Why don't you read fire·ball / fī(-ə)r-ˌbȯl/ and see if you can find the key word con.jure /'kən-ˈju̇r/ anywhere in it." -Maxperson
My preffered edition of this game is AD&D 1e. This is not the edition I started with - that would be the Basic set in 1980 - just my favorite.
Things I like; .Relitively quick character generation. Even if you use weapon/non-weapon proficiancies. There's not a terrible amount of down-time between character generation & play. Wich is alot different than in 3x+. And it's important because you may well have to generate a new PC in a hurry sometimes...
.Random stat generation. I've met very few people who don't like taking the chance to roll up a character with amazing stats. Of course that doesn't usually happen. But it could! And that's the draw. The down side {?} (at least in every group I've ever played in) is that if you don't roll up Mr. Awesome you've just got to do your best with whatever you did roll.... I'm OK with that.
.Weapon Speeds. And to some extent the weapons vrs armor +/- rules. I LIKE that there's a good reason to be swinging different types of weapons - beyond just the damage dice.
."Name Level". Someone else already commented about this - the recognition, the castles, the followers, etc - being cooler than just seeing your feat-train go into effect. I agree.
.Different xp charts for each class.
.The idea that the gods/forces that the clerics & druids, paladins, etc follow is important. And to a large degree alignment. It's pretty silly (in later editions) to think that if you're drawing power from these beings, & you then mis-use it or leave their service, that they've nothing to say on that matter.... Sure, your character might still know the words to "cure light wounds" etc, but there's no power backing them up.
.Magic items of all shapes, sizes, & questionable uses. Including cursed items, Decks of Many Things, artifacts....
.The 1e DMG. Hands down, this is the most usefull RPG book I've ever seen.
.The art. There's all different styles of art used throughout late 70s-90's D&D. Even in the same books! I love that.
.I also like that few groups actually play AD&D the same way. There's NO expectation that the game will run the same between groups. At least not like there is with 3x or 4e. Because they've provided their own answers to problems (seeing as there's little/no erratta for this edition {even where needed}), modified their games to suite thier table, etc.
.I like that there's actual risk of failure (death) for the characters.
.I like spell components. .I expect to have to keep track of consumables - like arrows. Afterall, a quiver only holds so many of them....
