| |
1st July 2009, 05:48 AM
|
#21 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,636
| +X swords may finally go, to be replaced with magic items that just have various properties and the like.
I think you could make a case to see stats stripped more and more away from actual game mechanics to the point where they aren't necessary. Don't think they will lose the stats, but they may have less impact on your character than in previous editions. |
| |
1st July 2009, 05:52 AM
|
#22 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 425
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug McCrae Classes, levels, armor class, hit points, d20 to hit, dungeons, dragons, spells, magic items, combat and gold pieces.
They will keep otyughs though. The game will be a round-table discussion. The players all play noted otyugh philosophers, scientists, pundits, cultural commentators, orientalists and peril experts debating issues of the day on live TV. And you'll be able to phone in to vote off your least favourite otyugh. | I'm all for it if just we can bring back the arcane encumbrance rules from 1E! |
| |
1st July 2009, 05:52 AM
|
#23 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada
Posts: 2,452
| I am hoping that next-edition speculation will be the first to go.
__________________ -Kaodi
Good name in man and woman, dear my lord,
Is the immediate jewel of their souls.
Who steals my purse steals trash; 'tis something, nothing;
'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands;
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him
And makes me poor indeed.
-Iago, Shakespeare's Othello, Act III. Scene III. Lines 180-186. |
| |
1st July 2009, 05:56 AM
|
#24 (permalink)
| | Landless Lord
Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 2,420
| I suspect even more randomness will disappear.
Depending on where technology is in a few years, I'm almost ready to suggest the very idea of the in-person tabletop game will - if not disappear - be relegated to no more than an option, with the primary game being via a virtual tabletop and, of course, subscription-based. I'd not be at all surprised if the virtual game had elements and rules that were only accessible that way, and not included in the printed version - as in "We'll sell you this in-print introductory game for cheap, and it's quite playable; but if you want to play the *real* game you'll have to go online, and subscribe..."
I wouldn't be surprised to see even more streamlining of weapon and armour types - armour, for example, might be reduced to merely a "none-light-medium-heavy" division (thus only 4 armour variants) with actual type left merely as flavour. So, no more leather vs. studded vs. ring mail - it's all just "light". 4e's dailies will go; as the last remaining vestige of Vancian-style resource management, they don't have a chance.
Worldbuilding might get thrown under the bus, to be replaced with adventure-path campaigns. No more sandboxes, at least not in core design.
And, for the record and if anyone cares, I stand opposed to all of these changes. I merely point out that these cows are probably lining up right now for the abbotoir, whether I want them to or not.
Lan-"if it's light armour, why doesn't it help me see in the dark?"-efan
__________________ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * DM: Telenet 1984-1994, Riveria 1995-2007, Decast 2008 --> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * |
| |
1st July 2009, 06:08 AM
|
#25 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,955
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanefan - armour, for example, might be reduced to merely a "none-light-medium-heavy" division (thus only 4 armour variants) with actual type left merely as flavour. So, no more leather vs. studded vs. ring mail - it's all just "light". | I really like this- but I doubt Wotc will simplify things that much. Cause it loses a way to sell things. OTOH I have recently seen on some video game interview a video game whose engine create all these "items" by itself on the go. Random-item-generator or something like that. At that point it becomes futile trying to play the mini-game of collecting the best armor suit or what have you and the fun is all about what you get each time you stumble upon some new piece of equipment and trying it out. As for myself, it always annoyed me having to figure out what is the best armour suit or something like that. My buddies do not care at all and it honestly adds nothing to the game while we are playing -just substructs us instead. |
| |
1st July 2009, 06:18 AM
|
#26 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,830
| I would say alignment would be something to go, perhaps getting only mentioned as a optional thing.
__________________ Secret Member of... *blink, blink* Damn you amnesia! |
| |
1st July 2009, 06:18 AM
|
#27 (permalink)
| | Freelance Artist
Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
Posts: 9,233
| Quote:
Originally Posted by ggroy I wouldn't be surprised if they're already working on a 5E D&D.
As a historical precedent, work on 4E was already underway in early 2005 which was a bit over a year after 3.5E was released.
I would imagine they would want a 5E product ready, if it turns out the 4E "well" runs dry earlier than they anticipated. | Do note that thanks to the DDi, D&D now has a steady revenue that is independent of new core books. The DDi, IMHO, reduces the "must release updated core books" drive, and makes the edition cycle much longer than it has been in the past. |
| |
1st July 2009, 06:32 AM
|
#28 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 136
| I've heard a lot about the game turning into an online table-top thing, but I just find that so unlikely. As much as people love technology, I think people like to interact with people face to face, and to touch real, tangible objects to play a game with. And especially with a game like D&D, where it's all about imagining things and atmosphere.
I could of course be wrong.
__________________ IF IT EXISTS, NERDS WILL ARGUE ABOUT IT |
| |
1st July 2009, 06:56 AM
|
#29 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 742
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Fallen Seraph I would say alignment would be something to go, perhaps getting only mentioned as a optional thing. | I remember back in the 1E AD&D days, some DM's I knew paid close attention to how players played their characters according to alignment.
As the years went by, many DMs of the games I played in, paid less and less attention to alignment along the lawful-chaotic axis. Though they still did pay attention to the good-evil axis.
These days, I don't really pay much attention to alignment other than if a player is deliberately being disruptive to the game and using their character's alignment as an excuse for being personally stupid. |
| |
1st July 2009, 07:02 AM
|
#31 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Soviet Canuckistan
Posts: 214
| I doubt they'll kill many at all. They didn't hesitate very much to get rid of what they didn't like with 4e. The only ones I think will go are the ones that 4e merely gives lip service to. For example, the option for rolling for attributes. Have you taken a look at that rule recently? The 4e implementation makes it clear that random attributes really don't belong. So, that'll be gone. I suspect if you really want to know what sacred cows will be gone in the next edition, you should look for stuff like that. There's probably several more examples of stuff they really didn't want to include, but did out of tradition. |
| |
1st July 2009, 07:06 AM
|
#32 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 742
| Quote:
Originally Posted by outsider There's probably several more examples of stuff they really didn't want to include, but did out of tradition. | What would be specific examples of this, besides the rolling for attributes? |
| |
1st July 2009, 07:11 AM
|
#33 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 25
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Fallen Seraph I would say alignment would be something to go, perhaps getting only mentioned as a optional thing. | Hmm...I kinda thought it was pretty much optional for 4e anyways...at least that's how it's treated |
| |
1st July 2009, 07:22 AM
|
#34 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Soviet Canuckistan
Posts: 214
| I don't have any other examples off the top of my head. That's the one that really jumped out at me when I originally read the PHB, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's a couple more(though not many, as they definitely weren't afraid to slaughter sacred cows in this edition). I'll pull out my phb and read a bit, see if I can come up with any others. |
| |
1st July 2009, 07:59 AM
|
#35 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,324
| I think +x items will probably go. We may still see tiered equipment, similar to the way 4E treats masterwork armor (I don't want to see even that, but it might exist), but I really do think that +x benefits need to go for significant game design reasons. If nothing else, they just limit certain class concepts (anything that doesn't use a weapon has to jump through hoops) and force the need to constantly upgrade items along a predetermined track, allowing the possibility of getting ahead of that track or falling behind it. Limiting stat-boosting items in 4E opened up the magic item system a lot compared to 3E, and removing +x items would help just as much if not more.
While I don't quite expect it, I wouldn't mind seeing the Fighter class, as in a single class that is designed to embody as many combat styles and archetypes as possible, get diminished even further. It should get broken apart into several different classes the same way the Wizard was broken up in 4E.
Honestly, I would really like to see them break down the "Dungeons and Dragons is an exclusively fantasy genre game" barrier, so that fantasy, modern, and futuristic settings and concepts could all be melded together seamlessly. |
| |
1st July 2009, 08:11 AM
|
#36 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,830
| Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinBahamut Honestly, I would really like to see them break down the "Dungeons and Dragons is an exclusively fantasy genre game" barrier, so that fantasy, modern, and futuristic settings and concepts could all be melded together seamlessly. | I don't see it happening. But that would be great. Or even just breaking out beyond just traditional high-fantasy and having many different types built into core. To be able to pull off a game like Perdido Street Station from just core D&D be awesome.
__________________ Secret Member of... *blink, blink* Damn you amnesia! |
| |
1st July 2009, 08:24 AM
|
#37 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Münster, Germany
Posts: 307
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanefan Depending on where technology is in a few years, I'm almost ready to suggest the very idea of the in-person tabletop game will - if not disappear - be relegated to no more than an option, with the primary game being via a virtual tabletop and, of course, subscription-based. I'd not be at all surprised if the virtual game had elements and rules that were only accessible that way, and not included in the printed version - as in "We'll sell you this in-print introductory game for cheap, and it's quite playable; but if you want to play the *real* game you'll have to go online, and subscribe..." | This. WotC will move away from being a publishing company to performing as a service company. They'll probably sell you some infrastructure (core books with information on the real mechanisms but without game data [classes, races, powers], plus perhaps guide books to world buiolding and adventure writing) and provide you more stuff (character management, adventures, game data) in form of a rented service. A free demo version will give you access to a subset of the game data. You'll be able to make personalized printouts of the game data (character folio with all specific rules pertaining to this character, printed version of your aself-made adventure), if you insist on playing on your dinner table instead of in front of your screen.
Oh, and Paizo will release a completely revamped Pathfinder 2.0 which looks remarkably like D&D 4E.  |
| |
1st July 2009, 09:30 AM
|
#38 (permalink)
| | Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Harpenden, UK
Posts: 14,788
| As Piratecat says here How many pages will the 5E PHB have?, lets ditch the "5e" threads for a while, please.
__________________ Plane Sailing
(Enworld Admin)
If you need to email me click here "It makes as much sense as having Batman kill his parents and then go on to fight mutants from another dimension." - Rykion |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | | And yet another word from our sponsors | | | | | | | | | | Visit Our Sponsors | | | | Community Supporter Subscriptions | LATEST EXCLUSIVE CONTENT FOR SUBSCRIBERS | Visit Our Sponsors... Again | | | | |