D&D 5th Edition announced

[Rain Yupa]

First, the article.

It's obviously in its pre-production stages, but Wizards of the Coast wish to move on to greener pastures dungeons. They want to make an edition that reflects the popularity of 3rd, the ingenuity of 4th, and probably as strong foundation as AD&D and 2nd editions.

To do this, they are turning to the public for ideas. On the official site, you can sign up here. I think this is a smart move on behalf of the game's design itself, but... I dunno, it seems rather desperate of a move by WotC's sake.

Honestly, for me, a player who's only been playing since 3rd was released (though I had dabbled a bit in 2nd edition in my high school days, though I disliked the system terribly), I still say that 4th edition (not Essentials) is my favorite one. But I have very fond memories of 3rd edition.

I hope 5th edition maintains a lot of the balancing properties of 4th, which I love terribly. Though, a teeny bit more class diversion would be preferred, and I would actually to see a greater emphasis on skills, like there was in 3rd edition. Skills are what ran most of the non-combat encounters, and I just felt that the skill choices in 4th were far too compact.

Also, I hope they make magic items cooler again. None of that "a general bonus, and/or a one time use" for everything that I see in 4th. I think the D&D forums will probably be abuzz with similar suggestions and don't personally see the need to sign up myself. But if anyone on this guild does, let us know what you want us to pass along, and what updates there are and what a general consensus is.  

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Ponies.  

[Bedlam Crumpet]

Suicidesoldier#1

Ponies.

Brohoof.  

[Plainsfox]

I want something that has the accessibility of 3rd Edition. The System Resource Document gave me characters I was happy with and that I played to 20+. It also made me feel less disenfranchised after the jump from 3.0 to 3.5 left me feeling used.  

[Bedlam Crumpet]

I like the ease of character building of 4e, but added customization would be pretty good to me.  

[Suicidesoldier#1]

TheMoonShadow

Suicidesoldier#1

Ponies.

Brohoof.

blaugh  

[Mongooseh]

Moonshadow, Suicide please keep on topic you aren't providing anything constructive.

That said. It's not too much surprise that WOTC is starting to take a Gamesworkshop approach to games now.

"Keep releasing new editions so they'll have to buy the splat books. Again!"

"Brilliant sir!"  

[Arc Vembris]

Rain, if you wanted more class diversion you should've checked out essentials. the new class builds really made them operate differently.

Given Mike Mearls' articles, skill verisimilitude is on the decrease, focusing on ways to use ability checks in new ways rather than an expanded skill list. I think this high-transparency model of game design is the way to go in today's environment.  

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Mongooseh

Moonshadow, Suicide please keep on topic you aren't providing anything constructive.

That said. It's not too much surprise that WOTC is starting to take a Gamesworkshop approach to games now.

"Keep releasing new editions so they'll have to buy the splat books. Again!"

"Brilliant sir!"

Now you can't prove that.

The fact that ponies aren't constructive, that is. wink


And it doesn't seem too crazy that they would want more money; after all, they designed a lot of stuff, have a lot of writing, and thought a lot of stuff through, and even gave pictures and stuff.

You are paying for an idea, like in a normal book, but this is way more in depth, a lot more complicated, and even interactive.


That being said, I do understand the sentiment of not wanting to not buy new books, especially sense it seems they just finished selling the last 4E ones.

What warranted 5E so soon I don't know, and whether or not people will just choose to hold back and play 4E for quite some time, in large part due to cost, I'm not sure.  

[Lord of the Vine]

Mongooseh

Moonshadow, Suicide please keep on topic you aren't providing anything constructive.

That said. It's not too much surprise that WOTC is starting to take a Gamesworkshop approach to games now.

"Keep releasing new editions so they'll have to buy the splat books. Again!"

"Brilliant sir!"

Its a damn good marketing ploy.  

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Arc Vembris

Rain, if you wanted more class diversion you should've checked out essentials. the new class builds really made them operate differently.

Given Mike Mearls' articles, skill verisimilitude is on the decrease, focusing on ways to use ability checks in new ways rather than an expanded skill list. I think this high-transparency model of game design is the way to go in today's environment.

He's definitely right, and imo berserkers definitely add something I thought was a great addition to the game.

I personally think they are a little OP, but apparently to a lot of people they are underpowered, so more power to them sense everyone else thinks it's balanced, at least to a degree that makes them okay defenders and strikers.


Then again I see all kinds of crazy stuff other people don't.

Witches are also great, I personally think that they are such an awesome concept (wizard without a spellbooksz, aw yeah!), and a built in familiar is just awesome.


Blackgaurds suck, but that's why I'm in the process of designing a death knight.

I've found a pretty good balance that I think isn't OP but is still good enough to replace Lay on Hands, but that's hard to do without being too OP; I've basically settled on spending a healing surge to provide an extra 1[W] damage as a daily a certain amounts of times equal to a stat modifier, but what stat this should be based on has been tricky; I also want some of their stuff to be based on constitution rather than Charisma, but making that not OP has been tricky as well.


When you think about it it's only a marginal increase in health and in the long run wouldn't really mean much.

It would also be sort of gimped as you wouldn't do as much damage; I'm thinking about making everything require a two-handed weapon, so you can't use a shield, hence why being con based wouldn't be that OP (but you wouldn't add like a D6 like with barbarians).  

[Cute Things In Jars]

5e now?
man....now i gotta save for the books  

[Arc Vembris]

For those having trouble reading the article, 5e isn't coming out now, it's being announced now that they are developing 5e and would appreciate your input. It's not even being called 5e officially, they're working with D&DNext. Between development, the stated playtesting schedule, and publication, best bets have it out at the combined DDXP/Gencon in 2013  

[Disciple of Sakura]

I'll openly admit that I don't play 4.x, because it never appealed to me on the few times I did give it a shot.

Nevertheless, from the OP, it sounds like WotC's doing their best to try and pull a Pathfinder out of their asses. Going to the community and listening (unlike last time), looking for things that they can take from 3.x, building on the history of the franchise rather than throwing it out like garbage... these are all things Paizo did with a tremendous amount of success.

Personally, I'm not terribly surprised. But I also didn't enjoy 4.x as an RPG, so take that with a grain of salt.  

[Arc Vembris]

Disciple of Sakura

building on the history of the franchise rather than throwing it out like garbage...

Oh I dunno, 4e had Sigil and Dark Sun. I don't think Sigil appeared in 3.5 until it made a cameo in Queen of the Demonweb Pits