Speak Your Mind in the Next Version of Dungeons & Dragons

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Speak Your Mind in the Next Version of Dungeons & Dragons

Wizards of the Coast confirms the design team is busy working on a new version of D&D.

Read Full Article

I hope they're not kidding about maintaining support for 4th edition. It's not that I'm too stubborn to move on, as I'm certain the next edition will be lovely, but those manuals are god-awfully expensive.

Lord Beautiful:
I hope they're not kidding about maintaining support for 4th edition. It's not that I'm too stubborn to move on, as I'm certain the next edition will be lovely, but those manuals are god-awfully expensive.

Word. My group started on Essentials and just decided to upgrade to regular 4th edition. I don't want to tell them that we have to spend another $60 bucks on a *third* set of rulebooks.

Play tests are always a good thing, and I'm glad that they seem to be taking things seriously this time around.

I'm almost wondering if this is too soon. Will there be edition burn out?

Where as I only bought the first three core rule books before I realized that 4th edition was not for me. So I guess I'm looking forward to a new edition. Glad to see Monte Cook back on the team. Now hire Zeb Cook and get some quality flowing.

TJ Johnston:
Play tests are always a good thing, and I'm glad that they seem to be taking things seriously this time around.

I'm almost wondering if this is too soon. Will there be edition burn out?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editions_of_Dungeons_%26_Dragons

They're more or less right on schedule.

Hybrid D&D, huh?

Not a bad way to get people to find which editions suit them if they find some hybrid rules more appealing than others.

Scars Unseen:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editions_of_Dungeons_%26_Dragons

They're more or less right on schedule.

Eh. Maybe it's my age or the fact that events in my life keep coming at me so quickly, but I feel like I JUST bought fourth edition (even though I bought it back when it first came out).

I'm going to play test this new edition, and hopefully I'll like it as much as Mr. Tito has. I love Pathfinder, but there's a part of me that wants to roll dice with good ole DnD.

I am... scared.

I think Wizards is dragging their franchise down Square-Enix's Final Fantasy path, and it concerns me greatly.

If they want to resume this path, I highly recommend they look at the rule system for Star Wars Sage Edition. I had thought 3.5e was the greatest d20 system, until I DMed a session of SW Saga Edition and thought 'Holy hell, they've actually perfected the damn thing! Fast and fluid, plus a hoot to enjoy. Bravo'.

But, I will give it a go... at some point.

Lord Beautiful:
I hope they're not kidding about maintaining support for 4th edition. It's not that I'm too stubborn to move on, as I'm certain the next edition will be lovely, but those manuals are god-awfully expensive.

Yeah, there's a lot of investment involved, which is the main reason I'm usually slow to shift editions.

Though the confirmation of a new edition kind of puts me in an odd spot. Early last year, my Roleplaying books were all destroyed by the fire in my building (actually, the water used to fight the fire). I recently got into a place where I could afford to actually throw some cash at some RPG titles, but I don't want to invest in 4E until I see how the new iteration plays out. I might like it, I might hate it, but I'd hate to start investing again now.

Maybe I'll just buy an old 3.5E core set and run with that for a while.

VoidWanderer:
I am... scared.

I think Wizards is dragging their franchise down Square-Enix's Final Fantasy path, and it concerns me greatly.

If they want to resume this path, I highly recommend they look at the rule system for Star Wars Sage Edition. I had thought 3.5e was the greatest d20 system, until I DMed a session of SW Saga Edition and thought 'Holy hell, they've actually perfected the damn thing! Fast and fluid, plus a hoot to enjoy. Bravo'.

But, I will give it a go... at some point.

In many ways, Saga was a prototype for 4E, so they did sort of go down that path. Unfortunately, only sort of.

It's a shame Saga's no longer on the market. I'm a Star Wars fan and I loved Saga Edition, but apparently there's no money in tabletop Star Wars stuff.

Let's hope this time it goes back to being an RPG instead of a poorly designed wargame. The combat grid has killed roleplaying as early as the Player's Options & Combat in 2e AD&D, somehow i don't think the designers will understand the difference this time around, or ever again. 4e is the apex of that design flaw, every game where moving pieces in the combat grid takes at least 80% of the session time is not about roleplaying anymore its just a heavy and cumbersome boardgame.

The best news so far for me:

The Forgotten Realms will be supported from the start, and a video game art studio from China has been hired to fully detail the Realms. I asked if going forward support would be continued for the current time after the Spellplague and the Neverwinter Campaign. A WotC spokesperson answered, "The Forgotten Realms has a rich history and we will support all of it. It is for the gamers to decide which time they would enjoy playing in."

source

EDIT: SIGN UP HERE FOR NOTIFICATION OF THE PLAY TESTING!

Lord Beautiful:
I hope they're not kidding about maintaining support for 4th edition. It's not that I'm too stubborn to move on, as I'm certain the next edition will be lovely, but those manuals are god-awfully expensive.

Agreed, I've spent millions of dollars in all the special handbooks suddenly they'll be like "buy em again?"

Aww. I, literally, just bought a 4th edition Player's handbook. Well I suppose I still need it to play in my friend's campaign.

I'm looking forward to see how they change things.

We backed 4e for a little while. Cause frankly with 3e while the game was great for PCs, the DMs got frustrated after 6th level. Fights would take FOREVER (How many attacks can you do... oh... We're going to watch a movie. hope you'll be done soon after it ends.). Spent hours making cool monster that would be dust in 3 rounds... 3 long rounds. In 4e fights went quicker and monster we made were rememberable and could still be challenging... but the 4e fights seemed to lack soul (as a few people put it). I'm a guy who plays in 5 games a week... 4e is now only 1 night and 3e never goes past 6 level (currently Zero 3e games I'm in). We stopped buying 4e books after the core 3 (plus PHB2,3 and MM2), Not going to give Essentials a try (why would we buy more books about a system that makes us go "meh"). And none of my friends even want to try Pathfinder for all the 3e issues they've had.

That's some creative spin there. D&D was basically dead after 2nd edition, and 3rd edition ressurected it and became massively more popular. 4th edition has essentially been a disaster. All the people I know who played 4th edition have now either gone back to 3E or moved on to Pathfinder. 4th edition was a terrible, poorly designed, amateurish attempt at a game. They should have called it "D&D Tactics" or something, and made it a spin-off, because it does not deserve to be a "real" Dungeons and Dragons game.

I have one rule for improving the next version of D&D. SELL IT IN WAL-MART. Why do I say that? Because there are no game shops anywhere near me and they don't sell it anywhere else.

Congratulations to Greg and the Escapist on his mention in the New York Times regarding the D&D overhaul (at least in its online incarnation)!

Allow me to don my 25/- Fire Damage Resisting pantaloons and say:

Thou need to ditch paper and go digital.

BUT D&D IS ABOUT PLAYING FACE TO FACE IN A BASEMENT AND BLAHBLAHBLAH no. It was. It isn't anymore. It worked for nerds in the 80's because thats how nerds in the 80's congregated - in dark rooms and basements with bottles of mountain dew, together. These days nerds have the INTERNET, so they stay in their own dark rooms and basements with bottles of mountain dew, alone.

I need to be able to hop on the internet, build a character sheet, select some char clipart, and find a group and a DM halfway acrossed the world. D&D needs to be a social network with the built in tools and equipment for playing the game including on the fly rule referencing, map making tools, shareible information and PMing, etc.

Greg Tito:
"We want to release a great product, one that [fans] have helped develop,"

Well, it'll be fun to see their attempt to compete with Pathfinder.

image

Not even out 4 years and they're developing the new edition, huh? Sounds like WotC is already running out of ideas for splatbooks to make people spend money. I notice in the history of releases in the Wikipedia article that while revisions and touch ups occur regularly, the actual shifts in edition tended to take 10 years or so, though the 3rd to 4th span was only 8 years.

My own game group just switched over to Pathfinder mostly because we like where Paizo took the 3rd edition mechanics. D&D 4th ed tried to hard to achieve balance and made every class too samey for our tastes.

TsunamiWombat:
Allow me to don my 25/- Fire Damage Resisting pantaloons and say:

Thou need to ditch paper and go digital.

BUT D&D IS ABOUT PLAYING FACE TO FACE IN A BASEMENT AND BLAHBLAHBLAH no. It was. It isn't anymore. It worked for nerds in the 80's because thats how nerds in the 80's congregated - in dark rooms and basements with bottles of mountain dew, together. These days nerds have the INTERNET, so they stay in their own dark rooms and basements with bottles of mountain dew, alone.

I need to be able to hop on the internet, build a character sheet, select some char clipart, and find a group and a DM halfway acrossed the world. D&D needs to be a social network with the built in tools and equipment for playing the game including on the fly rule referencing, map making tools, shareible information and PMing, etc.

It needs to be both. I DM in an online group and it works great (we've been going strong for 3+ years now and DM duties rotate and all sorts). Very flexible and great for me as in my local area in the UK there is very little way of finding a face to face group.

That said, I recently ran a few face to face games for some guys at work and it was great. A very different experience than playing on the net (harder from a DM perspective actually) but I really enjoyed it. I wouldn't want to never play face to face again, but I also wouldn't want to lose the convenience and flexibility of having an online group to play with.

You are right that the online aspect needs to be embraced though and the D&D insider tools (with char builder and monster builder) are (while a little niggly) brilliant. I love having them available to me, esp if I want to roll up chars for new players.

Now, I will come out and say, I'm a nerd and a geek. But I've never played a game of DnD, mainly due to my lack of real life friends. I only just began to collect the 4th edition books for artwork sake alone, maybe I'd find a group.

One thing I've never understood, why do people hate 4th edition so much? What was about it that people just seem to dislike? I'm just very curious as to why.

dragongit:
Now, I will come out and say, I'm a nerd and a geek. But I've never played a game of DnD, mainly due to my lack of real life friends. I only just began to collect the 4th edition books for artwork sake alone, maybe I'd find a group.

One thing I've never understood, why do people hate 4th edition so much? What was about it that people just seem to dislike? I'm just very curious as to why.

Because it over-streamlined the game from 3.5. Now 3.5 had its issues, some of which have already been stated, but a lot of the storytelling and DM-centric parts of the game were removed in favor of a more dynamic battle system that's a lot more WoW-esque, with larger battles and more abilities for the PCs that all ran together creating a very homogeneous set of rules that limited PCs ability to feel unique.

Pathfinder and Spycraft 1.0 are currently the best versions of the 3.5 ruleset and that's all me and my friends currently play. If 5e can bring back some more of the customization of the old editions, and not make me feel like I'm playing exalted, who knows... maybe we'll switch. But for now, I won't be holding my breath, or saving up any scratch.

Scars Unseen:
Where as I only bought the first three core rule books before I realized that 4th edition was not for me.

Same for me, but it was also released about the same time my regular gaming group broke up so I've never had a decent game with it. Maybe its like Doctor Who and everyone's favourite is their first Doctor?

TsunamiWombat:
Thou need to ditch paper and go digital.

While I agree they do need to go down this route, it should not be online only. My gaming group was a group of 6 who all hated clubbing and drinking so instead of going out on a Friday night, we'd meet up and play PnP RPGs instead and they were always a lot of fun. Your "Nerd in a dark room alone" is true, but that doen't mean the nerd doesn't enjoy going out every so often and PnP RPGs ware a great reason. Also, don't forget going online means fighting for space against every single MMO and multiplayer game there is. If I wanted to sit at my PC on my own with friends online, its easier and cheaper to all join an MMO.

All I want for Christmas is a decent set of rules concerning overland exploration/survivalism.

Grognards and simulationists are sad.

To be honest it doesn't matter if I'm running OGL rule sets like 3.x, Pathfinder, Legends or even Dice pool systems like Shadowrun or nWOD I will always create a batch of homebrew rulesets that make sense for me and my group.

That being said I never have understood the massive amounts of pure unadulterated neckbeard rage at the newest additions of their favourite systems, the core mechanics may have changed slightly and admittedly there are a few flaws that are counterintuitive and some that just flat out don't make sense mechanically but that is why we DM's use our discretion.

I don't believe that any system should act as a stumbling block for roleplaying because all pen and paper game rulesets use a very similar core system, contested rolls. I didn't like 4e but I think that had more to do with the GROUP I played with rather than the ruleset itself.

The biggest issue I had with 4e was the orthogonal power proportions between for example, an Infernalist pact Warlock and a run of the mill Eladrin Wizard. Their powers were very similar in terms of game mechanics or "crunch" but it seemed that they had different lore and flavor built around these very (almost identical) powers, so the one thing this direction seemed to espouse is an UNGODLY long time to resolve combat situations.

The encounters were ridiculously protracted for this reason. New players considered their moves much more carefully and because this also extended towards martial classes now fighters were taking awhile longer to decide if they wanted to use their daily powers or not.

But don't you see why they did this? Remember 3.x CoDzilla? If you roll a martial character and you end up in a higher level campaign with core races and feats, most newer players won't use their environment creatively and your sessions will end up like this video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbzUfV3_JIA

So I can respect Wizards attempt to give martial characters something to do, but FUUUUCK, the only real difference between these powers pretty much boils down to flavor text.

So that is why my 4e game sucked, because our DM was interested more in a: ENCOUNTERS, FLAVOR TEXT EXPOSITION, A SKILL ROLL OR TWO, RINSE REPEAT approach rather than a much more varied and dynamic stance on how to run one of these things.

In my sessions, the players will deal with 1-2 encounters at the very most and our games last for 6-12 hours and believe me, we do more than just receive adventures from puissant and poorly veiled BBEG's and slay a group of trolls. So the one lesson Wizards should hopefully walk away from 4e with is that people need actual gameplay variety, not COKE vs PEPSI.

KKDragonLord:
4e is the apex of that design flaw, every game where moving pieces in the combat grid takes at least 80% of the session time is not about roleplaying anymore its just a heavy and cumbersome boardgame.

Eusebiusdreams:
... powers were very similar in terms of game mechanics or "crunch" but it seemed that they had different lore and flavor built around these very (almost identical) powers, so the one thing this direction seemed to espouse is an UNGODLY long time to resolve combat situations.

The encounters were ridiculously protracted for this reason. New players considered their moves much more carefully and because this also extended towards martial classes now fighters were taking awhile longer to decide if they wanted to use their daily powers or not.

I agree completely with both of these complaints - to summarize: WoTC needs to streamline the combat system (or at least make its more baroque excesses optional) so that there's time left for story-telling/role-playing.

dragongit:
Now, I will come out and say, I'm a nerd and a geek. But I've never played a game of DnD, mainly due to my lack of real life friends. I only just began to collect the 4th edition books for artwork sake alone, maybe I'd find a group.

One thing I've never understood, why do people hate 4th edition so much? What was about it that people just seem to dislike? I'm just very curious as to why.

Best advice, don't listen to what anyone says. All they'll do is ladel their opinions on you and that may or may not be any use whatsoever. Also, not everyone hates 4e. Just as many people like it as hate it, just the people who hate are more vocal :-/

Personally, I listened to the Penny Arcade podcasts when they first came out. I had never played any tabletop game before but I thought it sounded fun when I listened. I found myself an online group (no fact to face groups in my area) playing 4e and I joined. 3+ years later and we're still having a blast (and i'm currently DMing).

My group contains new gamers and old school gamers, all of whom really like the system. Over the 3+ years we've also had members come and go who were new and old school who did not like the system.

Bottom line, try it. If you enjoy playing it, who cares what anyone else says. If you don't, try some of the other recommended systems.

And yet again I am kicked in the balls for not being able to play D&D, much regret was had.

I only have three suggestions.

1. Better rules for skill based encounters.

2. Don't go overkill with the number of classes that fit into a single archetype, but don't under do it either. One controller in the first phb was just pathetic, as was the abundance of strikers throughout the system's history. As an addendum to this suggestion, keep the overall feel of the classes varied.

3. KEEP THE FUCKING HYBRID SYSTEM OF MULTI-CLASSING! I read that part of phb3 and tried to make my group make the jump to 4th edition that very instant. It is a multi-classing system that actually gives you abilities that match up with the other members of your party without you having to munchkin. I love it.

About time. 4e needs an overhaul to say the least. I wonder if they're gonna come out with a new edition of Star Wars before this release like they've done before? Saga really wasn't my cup of tea.

You know this has me worried.

I remember when Metallica said they were going back to their roots and drawing inspiration from their old works.
Remember how well that worked out? Remember what they made? St. Anger! That was the piece of garbage they created out of their old work!

I fear that D&D 5th edition will be some sort of horrible unplayable mess.
So I'm going to grab my 3rd edition books again, and just play with those and ignore all the drivel that is to come.

4e gameplay was fairly terrible. Not only did a lot of the powers make no sense but they were both overpowered and EVERYONE had them so they got boring.

The non-combat "challenge" system just didn't work that well and lost a lot of flexibility over "roll the dice and ill make an outcome based on the roll".

The biggest downfall of 3e IMO was the abandonment of E-Tools. If WotC came out with software that automated away most of the paperwork that DMs needed to do it would go a long way toward alleviating DM burnout. The oss community tried to fix this problem with PC-gen and that was still half assed (as of many years ago last time I tried it).

As a DM I want to function within the rules but the rules shouldn't prevent me from doing stuff that is cool in game, it should create a consistent framework so that the players can make intelligent decisions about their character's actions.

And I disagreed with a lot of the 4e philosophy. Maybe an individual round of combat was boring for a fighter but the overall gameplay of the fighter as a class was better. The reason is because the overall gameplay of a fighter was different than a cleric, or ranger, or wizard. Unlike 4e where everyone has basically the same powers but with different names.

One thing I really did like about 4e was the "templateizing" of the races and classes. A cleric had power set X, an elf had ractial abilities Y. So an elf cleric had x+y active powers to choose from that may or may not synergize with each other. But it was great for players because it meant that enemy kobolds really did act fundamentally different than enemy goblins in a unique way.

Overall I'm excited about 5th edition and hopefully WotC learns from the mistakes of 4th and brings back the awe and discovery of playing 3rd.

I would actually like to see entirely new settings. Not just Dark Sun and Eberron reboots.

Well... I wouldn't mind Spelljammer because like the demotivational says, "Star Trek meets D&D it's like porn for nerds."

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here