WotC Seeks Unity with a New Edition

Jan van Leyden · Jan 10, 2012

tecnowraith said:
I have a few questions:
What makes D&D game feel old school-esque?
What was good about 3.5 that fans liked?
What was good about 4.0 that fans liked?
D&D all about Classes if not, it is possible to do D&D without classes? That players can make any character they want without the hassle? Some publishers (and even producers) think kids are stupid or unimaginative to come up with character on their own.

Man fans seem to focus on what they don't like in certain editions. And if the solution is to remove everything a group of fans doesn't like ... well, there won't be much left, I'm afraid.

Perhaps we'll see something with strictly defined classes a la 1e or BECMI as base and "advanced" systems like the feat/class-level system of 3.x and 4e's power system as options?

The L&L articles talked a lot about scaling within a subsystem, but they didn't - up to now - answer the question of basic class construction.

pogre · Jan 10, 2012

I like the opening salvo by WOTC. I'm excited to playtest.

I honestly am not crazy about Mearls and Monte's past work, but Mike said all of the right things as far as I am concerned.

Did not expect to be excited about D&D again, but I admit I am.

Echohawk · Jan 10, 2012

DaveMage said:
The problem is that from 2002-2013 there will have been 5 editions.

3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.Essentials, 5E. That's a LOT of edition turnover in 11 years.

Well, I guess we can be thankful that the pace of change over the last 11 years has slowed down slightly from the first 11 years of D&D's history:

1974-1985: Original D&D, AD&D, Basic Set (Holmes), Basic Set (Moldvay), Basic Set (Mentzer), AD&D UA.

:devil:

Spinachcat · Jan 10, 2012

So we are not getting the VTT? AKA, the only thing that can possibly invigorate D&D in the current era?

Wow. I guess Hasbro really has no faith in the D&D IP.

I can't see 5e succeeding in their "please everyone" fantasy. They can't make it Old School enough to please Old Schoolers at the same time pleasing fans of 3e and 4e.

I wonder who will create the "Pathfinder" version of 4e?

Wouldn't that be a hoot that WotC would be forced to compete with Pathfinder, the OSR and a 4e clone plus all those people who didn't leave 3e and 4e!!!

Talk about a house divided.

S'mon · Jan 10, 2012

Scott_Rouse said:
4e is broken as a game and business and it needs to go away.

That's pretty harsh!

I played it last night and it seemed to work ok. :erm:

mach1.9pants · Jan 10, 2012

^He was talking about business model and has clarified it as such with 4 e being his fave edition

DaveMage said:
The problem is that from 2002-2013 there will have been 5 editions.

3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.Essentials, 5E. That's a LOT of edition turnover in 11 years.

Monty Python said:
Three Sir!

DaveMage said:
Do you need the PHB, DMG, and MM if you have the Essentials products? (I was told "no".)

If the answer is "no", it's a new edition. It may be perfectly compatible with 4.0, but it's a new edition.

And, it doesn't matter if one plays 4.0E - it matters to the people that *don't* play 4.0E - it causes yet more edition confusion.

I disagree here, you can play Pathfinder Beginner Box (which has many different rules than the Core) without the PF Core Book but it is not a 'new edition'. Requiring the use of PHB et al to play does not define a new edition. Essentials is a fully compatible new set of options (classes races etc) in a slightly different layout

Baumi · Jan 10, 2012

DaveMage said:
The problem is that from 2002-2013 there will have been 5 editions.

3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.Essentials, 5E. That's a LOT of edition turnover in 11 years.

3E came out in the year 2000 and Essentials is not a new edition, so it's:

2000-2013 (13 Year Span): 3e, 3.5, 4E, 5E

Thats still a fast release of new editions, but not as bad as you have written. Also I want to point out that the shortest Edition from that was 3E and 4E will be 5 years in the market, which is the same as 3.5.

(Source: Dungeons & Dragons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )

Echohawk · Jan 10, 2012

mach1.9pants said:
I disagree here, you can play Pathfinder Beginner Box (which has many different rules than the Core) without the PF Core Book but it is not a 'new edition'. Requiring the use of PHB et al to play does not define a new edition. Essentials is a fully compatible new set of options (classes races etc) in a slightly different layout

The question of what exactly counts as an edition is a vexing one. Here's how I'd probably group the major rulebook/intro boxed sets, but a case could certainly be made for splitting up the BECMI column into two or more "editions", and similarly for D&D3/3.5.

The black boxes below indicate the period where TSR/WotC/Paizo was/is actively producing product for each ruleset, which gives a rough idea of the lifespan of each "iteration".

Baumi · Jan 10, 2012

About 5E .. I certainly look forward to the coming year, it will be an interesting time with many news, speculations and playtests.

Since I personally like 4E, I would love a new Edition that take 4E, reduce the powers to a more manageable level (at paragon+ it becomes to much with all the class, items, themes,..) and a much faster combat.

But since they want to get all players on board, I don't think they will base it to much on 4E and more on the basics that all D&D Editions have, like the 6 Attributes, AC, HP, etc. and just add a few optional systems for those who are not satisfied with such a simple system.

What I would find great is if they would have two complexity tiers for the characters that you can use at the same time in an group .. so the players who like complexity take the tactical one and the others take the Basic tier characters (a bit like 4E Companions but more suited for players).

S'mon · Jan 10, 2012

Alan Shutko said:
Not in my circle of friends. A whole bunch of split off from the 4e game and went pathfinder. Right now, neither the 4e players nor the PF players are playing in the others' games.

At the London D&D Meetup some people prefer Pathfinder and some people prefer 4e, but there is a lot of crossover, especially among players rather than GMs. I GM two 4e games there and I'm planning to start a Pathfinder Beginner Box game there soon.