Dear Unregistered! We notice you don't currently have a silver subscription here on EN World. We'd love to encourage you to give it a try, so we've made this coupon for $5 off your first 4-month Silver Subscription. Simply go to the subscription page and enter coupon code SILVER. With that subscription you get access to TWO adventure paths, which between them cover D&D 3.5, Pathfinder, and D&D 4th Edition - War of the Burning Sky (which has been completed) and ZEITGEIST: The Gears of Revolution (which is currently ongoing). You also get a whole bunch of site perks and features here on EN World, including access to the Search function, images and links in your forum signature, a larger PM box, give out more XP at a time, and more. Please give a try; we're proud of our adventure paths, and we're sure you'll love them both!
Share this page with your friends via Facebook, Twitter, and Google+.
It'd be criminal to keep this from them!
On January 9th, 2012, WotC officially
announced that it was working on
a new edition of D&D, although it was late 2010 that WotC first
seriously started thinking about a new edition. This was prompted by
divisions in the RPG community: "First, we had a divided audience.
Second, if we kept altering the core of 4th Edition, the division would
only become more apparent." - Mike
Mearls.
This page summarizes everything
we know about this new edition, and is updated regularly.
Keep checking back for new information! Notes on format:
The source is linked to where possible.
Where no source is linked, the info came from one of the
DDXP seminars. See below
for links for full transcripts.
Items in
italics are considered unreliable third party sources.
They are included for completeness' sake, but take with a
grain of salt.
IMPORTANT: PAGE MOVE:
Due to the increasing length of this page, it has been moved to a redesigned, paginated version. This page will be left here for a while, but updates from APRIL 20TH onwards are applied to the new page, not this one.
There are articles from
other outlets compiled further below.
If you're on Twitter, the
most popular hashtag for this
subject is
#dndnext.
EN
World's discussion forum for the next iteration of D&D can
be found here. Feel
free to join in!
Name
It is not known at this
point that the new iteration of D&D will even be called "5th
Edition". WotC is simply referring to it as a "new
iteration", or encouraging people to use the term "D&D Next".
“I think that the
actual naming of the game will come down to how the play-tests go and
how people react to it. I’d love to just call it Dungeons & Dragons
and leave the edition numbering behind.” - Mike
Mearls.
Design
Goals
"...to create a rule set
that enables players of all types and styles to play a D&D game
together by taking the best of each edition and getting at the soul of
what D&D is." - Mike
Mearls.
"The goal of this project is
to develop a universal rules system that takes from the best of every
edition and get at the soul of what D&D is." - WotC.
WotC stated
clearly "[We are] extremely
committed to tabletop gaming and the face to face experiences that
D&D brings." There is clear recognition that although digital
tools can enhance and supplement a game, the company has not lost sight
of the fact that D&D is a tabletop roleplaying game, and not a
digital experience.
"With fourth edition, there
was a huge focus on mechanics. The story was still there, but a lot of
our customers were having trouble getting to it. In some ways, it was
like we told people, ‘The right way to play guitar is to play
thrash metal,’ But there’s other ways to play
guitar.” - Mike
Mearls.
"The new edition is being
conceived of as a modular, flexible system, easily customized to
individual preferences. Just like a player makes his character, the
Dungeon Master can make his ruleset. He might say
‘I’m going to run a military campaign,
it’s going to be a lot of fighting’… so
he’d use the combat chapter, drop in miniatures rules, and
include the martial arts optional rules.” - Mike
Mearls.
"We hope to create a system
that allows players to use much of their existing content, regardless
of the edition. " - Mike
Mearls.
"I'm
the lead designer of a project that will likely evolve into a new
iteration of the Dungeons
&
Dragons ruleset. It's meant
to be a set of rules that unites all the previous editions, and the
players of those editions. It's a big project, and we plan on
involving all comers to playtest and voice their opinions, because
really, what's the point of designing a game no one wants to play? And
who knows better what D&D players want than, well, D&D
players. " - Monte
Cook.
"Working on a game that's
almost 40 years old now, we've seen the complex end. And what happened
with each edition of D&D is it got more complex and we need to
go back to the original D&D." - Mike
Mearls.
This
Legends
& Lore article by Monte
Cook says: "...this isn't another salvo in the so-called edition wars.
This isn't an attempt to get you to play Dungeons & Dragons in
a new way. This is the game you've already been playing, no matter what
edition or version you prefer. The goal here is to embrace all forms of
the D&D experience and to not exclude anyone. Imagine a game
where the core essence of D&D has been distilled down to a very
simple but entirely playable-in-its-right game. Now imagine that the
game offered you modular, optional add-ons that allow you to create the
character you want to play while letting the Dungeon Master create the
game he or she wants to run. Like simple rules for your story-driven
game? You're good to go. Like tactical combats and complex encounters?
You can have that too. Like ultra-customized character creation? It's
all there."
"One
of our employees had come up with the
initial idea which he used to work up an RPG system for his home group.
After talking with him, the R&D team went back to each edition
of D&D and started looking at the places where they overlapped
with each other and how they were unique. That kicked off the process
that led to where we are today." - Mike
Mearls.
Intro
Box Set? "The D&D Fantasy Roleplaying Game Starter
Set in the red box has also been a real success for us. It highlights
the importance of having a good intro product—something that is
definitely on our radar as we plan for the future." - Mike
Mearls.
On
role-playing, exploration, and combat: "If we
support those three things, we've covered about 90% of what's important
in the game." - Mike
Mearls
"In the next
iteration of the game, though, we’re looking at shifting the focus more
to the adventure, as opposed to individual encounters, and that will
likely mean that we want to increase the sense of danger, which I think
improves the experience during the exploration portions of the game." -
Rodney
Thompson.
Date
There has been no indication
of a launch date yet. However, the popular money is on Gen
Con 2013 due to the fact that DDXP will be moving to Gen Con that year.
Design
team
Mike Mearls, Team
Lead
Greg Bilsland, Team
Producer
Monte Cook, Design Team
Lead
Bruce Cordell,
Designer
Robert J. Schwalb,
Designer
Jeremy Crawford, Development
Team Lead
Tom LaPille,
Developer
Rodney Thompson, Developer
Miranda Horner, Editor
Public
Playtesting
WotC currently has a
"friends and family" insider playtest program.
[NEW
19 APRIL] This is roughly 1100 people. - D&D
Podcast
Wizards of the Coast will
open the new rules up to gamers and actively solicit feedback to shape
the game. They plan to leverage the relative popularity of the
Encounters program - an organized event in game stores where players
across the country participate in the same adventure each week - to
offer adventures written for the new iteration of D&D using the
new rules. Wizards plans to set up a website survey to track players'
feedback and get it quickly into the hands of Mearls and the team
designing the rules.
"We want to give the
community enough time to thoroughly digest each play test package.
Then, we need to make sure we have time to integrate player feedback
into each play test cycle so their needs and desires are captured in
the final product. This will take time." - Mike
Mearls.
You can sign up for public
playtests here.
"This is a whole new process for Wizards and we’re
excited to enlist the fan base to help shape the future of
D&D... this process is an opportunity for fans to help us craft
a new edition and help determine how the game is played moving forward."
Playtests are available at
DDXP in Jan 2011: "as a convention special this year, we will
be offering show attendees a first-look at a draft of the new set of
rules."
This playtest is called Caves
of Chaos: "Join the
first public playtest of the next iteration of the Dungeons &
Dragons roleplaying game. The playtest offers players the chance to run
pre-generated 1st-level characters through the Caves of Chaos,
a four-hour D&D adventure. Wizards of the Coast staff will be
running several tables each day. As part of the playtest, participants
must sign a special non-dislcosure agreement for playtesters."
Adventure
Description:
For years, Castellan
Keep has stood on civilization’s frontier, commanding a grand
view of that dismal realm known as the Borderlands. A forlorn place,
rife with monsters and terrors beyond imagining, adventurers have used
this fort to seek glory and plunder in this dangerous realm, to unearth
fabulous treasures and destroy foul monsters. Of all the haunts found
here, none equal the Caves of Chaos in both danger and the promise of
reward. Rumors abound of the wicked humanoids, the sinister monsters,
and the dark priests that run amok in this dungeon. Only the most
cunning and bold adventurers dare to face the dreaded caverns. Do you
have what it takes to survive the Caves of Chaos?
"...beginning sometime in
the spring, we will begin open playtesting. Through our web site, we
will release a growing set of rules, classes, monsters and other
materials for your study and feedback. "
"The idea is to start with big picture elements in the open
test, then narrow down to more specific elements of balance and so
forth." - Mike
Mearls.
"Stuff
like Castle Ravenloft had a big effect on
our decision, as it showed that we could focus the tabletop RPG on its
strengths rather than worrying about incorporating the latest trends in
gaming." - Mike
Mearls.
DDXP
(D&D Experience)
DDXP
(D&D Experience convention) was held this year from Jan
26-29, 2012. There was new 5E information there.
In addition to the above mentioned playtests, the schedule
included:
Charting the
Course: An
Edition for all Editions
(Thursday) - Join Mike Mearls, Monte Cook, and Jeremy Crawford as they
discuss the origin for the idea to create an edition of Dungeons & Dragons
that encompasses all previous editions. The designers discuss the
challenges in creating compatibility and balance, as well as the
exciting possibilities such a system creates. Seminar to be followed by
a Q&A session. [Read
seminar transcript]
Class Design:
From
Assassins to Wizards (Friday)
- Designers Monte Cook, Bruce Cordell, and Robert Schwalb discuss their
approach to class design, including the difficulties in creating iconic
versions of the classes that speak to players of all editions. Should
the cleric be more martial or more healer? Does the default ranger have
an animal companion? What level of complexity should the fighter have?
Seminar to be followed by a Q&A session. [Read
seminar transcript | Watch
video]
Future
Products and
Q&A (Saturday) - Mike
Mearls presents upcoming D&D products for 2012, as well as a
vision for the future of
Dungeons &
Dragons. Seminar is followed
by a Q&A session. Other members of R&D on hand to
answer questions as well. [Read
seminar transcript | Watch
video]
Reimagining
Skills and
Ability Scores (Sunday) - The
role of skills has fluctuated throughout the life of Dungeons & Dragons,
and ability scores have been of varying importance in each edition.
Find out what the design team has done to reimagine these aspects of
the game, and how they arrived at a system to marry the two concepts
more closely together. Seminar includes Monte Cook, Bruce Cordell, and
Robert Schwalb, and will be followed by a Q&A session. [Read
seminar transcript | Watch
video]
PAX East
2012
PAX
East takes place over three days from April 6-8.
Like the DDXP convention, it will include public playtests
and seminars. Relevant to 5E events include:
Playtest
Special: D&D Next (Friday 7pm) - Join in
a public playtest of the next iteration of the Dungeons & Dragons
game at PAX East. Play in an adventure with characters provided, and
give us your feedback to help guide the future of the D&D game!
Players of any editions of the game are welcome to participate. All
participants are required to sign a non-disclosure agreement. Length: 4
hours.
The Future of
Dungeons & Dragons (Saturday 1:30 pm – 2:30 pm -
Wyvern Theatre) - The next iteration of Dungeons & Dragons
is on its way! Join D&D Senior Manager Mike Mearls in a
Q&A about the next D&D, and how the open playtest is
using fan feedback to help shape the future of the game. The
full video for this seminar is below:
Mechanics
Alignment
"When
you think of classic D&D what elements spring to mind?"
-- "Alignment, Races, Classes, Monsters". Mike
Mearls.
"For now
though, the 9 alignments seem to be back, and the Paladin WAS LG, no
idea if that's an LG-only thing" [source]
"The
classic nine alignments are planned to be the default alignment
assumptions." - Rodney
Thompson.
"However,
we want alignment to be a tool, not a
straightjacket, so the execution of those mechanics should serve that
goal, and really only apply when dealing with the powerful, elemental
forces of alignments, not someone who just behaves a certain way.
Additionally, I believe we'll also want it to be easy for a DM to strip
those mechanics out of his or her campaign, if the DM so chooses." - Rodney
Thompson.
"Three
Pillars"
[NEW
19 APRIL] "In general, we want to make sure that everyone
has a baseline level of competence in all three pillars of play
(combat, interaction, and exploration)." - Rodney
Thompson
[NEW
19 APRIL] "...when it comes to customization points, we
want to let people choose what they want to focus on (be that combat,
diplomacy, being the best liar ever, being a super stealthy thief, or
whatever) and trust the baseline competence we've built into all
characters to make sure everyone feels like they can participate." - Rodney
Thompson
Overall Rules
structure
"Our
primary goal is to
produce a rules set that speaks to every incarnation of D&D. So
if you are a diehard BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia enthusiast or have embraced
4th edition, loved 2nd edition, 3rd edition, or never moved on from 1st
edition, we’re creating this game for you. Imagine a game
where you can play the version of D&D you love best. And then
imagine everyone plays at the same table, in the same adventure. We aim
to make a universal game system that lets you play the game in whatever
way, whatever style, with whatever focus you want, whether you want to
kick down doors and kill monsters, engage in high intrigue, intense
roleplaying, or simply to immerse yourself in a shared world.
We’re creating a game where the mechanics can be as complex
or as light as you want them. We’re creating the game you
want to play." - Robert
Schwalb.
Snippets
from a WotC
designers' Google+ Hangout playtest confirm the existence of dwarves,
lurkers, critical hits, paladins, clerics, trolls (which are
vulnerable to fire in some way), clerics, and an unonsciousness status.
Mainly no-brainers.
"Playtesting in the Lost
Caverns of Tsojcanth. My dwarf just slew a lurker with a well-timed
crit to save
the swallowed paladin." - Monte Cook.
"Playtested in the Lost
Caverns of Tsojcanth. My cleric burned several downed trolls before
they could finish off the unconscious paladin." - Bruce Cordell.
This
Legends
& Lore article by Monte
Cook says: "...this sounds so crazy that you probably won't believe it
right now—we're designing the game so that not every player
has to choose from the same set of options. Again, imagine a game where
one player has a simple character sheet that has just a few things
noted on it, and the player next to him has all sorts of skills, feats,
and special abilities. And yet they can still play the game together
and everything remains relatively balanced. Your 1E-loving friend can
play in your 3E-style game and not have to deal with all the options he
or she doesn't want or need. Or vice versa. It's all up to you to
decide."
"To
be clear, we're not talking about
creating a bridge so that you can play 1E and 4E at the same time.
Instead, we're allowing you to play a 1E-style game or a 4E-style game
with the same rules. Also, players at the table can choose the style of
character they want to play." - Monte
Cook.
"So,
the game is actually a matrix of
these choices, with some made by the DM and some by the players, which
will end up determining the feel of the overall game and might allow
the group to "emulate" a prior edition." - Monte
Cook.
"Players
can pick their own style and complexity
within a class. Think of it kind of like having a $10 budget to spend
on lunch. Some people will go to a restaurant and buy a $10 lunch
special. Someone else might spend that $10 by ordering a few different
things off the menu, rather than a special. Someone else might take
that $10 and go to the grocery store to buy all the ingredients for a
recipe they like. The idea is to put everyone on the same scale, but
then allow people to burrow into the level of detail they want. DMs
have a similar process they can go through, adding optional rules to
flesh out their campaigns. Those options can range from creating a
unique list of races or classes for a setting, to adding in special
rules for things like managing a kingdom or waging a war." - Mike
Mearls.
"We
actually went back and played every major
edition of D&D and used those experiences to help narrow down
the absolute core elements of the game. If you removed those elements,
it’s not D&D. Our list includes the six abilities, classes,
levels, hit points, Armor Class, and a few other things." - Mike
Mearls.
"I
can say that starting with the simplest base
possible is likely a given, as it’s far easier to add complexity to a
game rather than take it away." - Mike
Mearls. It sounds like the core game will be very basic, with
optional add-ons.
Mike
Mearls on the essentials of D&D: "The shared
language: HP, AC, and things that lead to a shared culture.Shared
stories: The Dread Gazeebo, the Head of Vecna, these things help make
our common culture."
Mike
Mearls "For example, a mass combat expansion would have a
basic, core system. Choose modules to play generals, etc. Are you
seeing the mass combat from the top down, or from an individual's POV?"
Monsters
"The Monsters are in the design teams hands now and we'll
be moving to development in the next few weeks. What I can say about
this goal that Monte is talking about is that we're working to provide
the DM with really good world building tools. And it's important to
provide information about the orcs place in D&D while making
sure that a Monster remains relevant as the characters level up.
They're might be an orc shaman, an orc champion or whatever for higher
levels, but we also want the basic orc to be relevant at higher levels.
We want it to be really easy for the DM to open the Monster Manual and
drop an orc or iconic monsters into the game." - Jeremy
Crawford
"While
many DMs want to build monsters using the
target numbers-based system that 4th edition uses, some DMs may want to
build their monsters like PCs, adding levels of cleric onto orcs to
create enemies that also have many class features. Some DMs may want to
use templates to create everything from a fiendish hobgoblin to a
vampiric half-celestial animated chair. So we'll need to find ways to
support those needs, without mandating them." - Rodney
Thompson.
"In
general, I think that monsters should do
what fans of D&D lore expect them to do, and if that means
being really scary mechanically then so be it. I think there's room in
the game for monsters that simply are more dangerous and deadly than
others, just as I think there's room in the game for monsters whose
purpose is to be interacted with, not fought. I also think it's good
for monsters to exist that you don't want to face in a straight-up
fight, but that you need to be prepared for or figure out a clever way
to outwit rather than going in spells a-blazin'." - Rodney
Thompson.
Minions:
"One of the things we're exploring in the game is what we
refer to as a bounded accuracy system. Effectively, we're looking into
whether or not we can strip out the assumption of accuracy and defense
scaling by level, and let progression rest largely within the scaling
damage, hit points, and capabilities of both characters and monsters.
When you have this, any monster whose hit points are less than the
damage you deal is, effectively, a minion. Thus, we might not need a
specific minion rule, because we would simply design monsters with hit
points that rest below average damage for certain levels and let that
take care of it (in other words, we do want monsters in the game that
do what minions do for us). At the same time, since as the player
characters gain levels their damage numbers are going up, monsters that
previously were not "minions" become "minions" by virtue of player
damage outstripping their hit points. Since AC and attack bonuses
aren't automatically scaling up, the orc that you fight at 1st level
that took three hits to kill may only take 1 hit to kill at 6th level,
making it a "minion" for heroes of that level." - Rodney
Thompson.
Solo
Monsters: "As far as "improving solo monsters" goes, there
are some things we have learned over the course of the last few years
that are vulnerabilities that can plague solo monsters; being taken out
of the fight by conditions like daze/stun/dominate, or lasting too long
so the fight starts to drag, running out of tricks to pull, being
challenging for the DM to run, etc. However, not all of these are
exclusively monster issues, and some can be solved by changing things
elsewhere in the game. For example, if we used something like the "hit
points as a threshold for affecting monsters" mechanic that Mike
described for "save or die" spells in a recent Legends
& Lore column, we can cut down on some of the
challenges solos face because of conditions." - Rodney
Thompson.
[NEW
19 APRIL] Morale:
Looking at re-introducing morale rules into the game.
- Robert
Schwalb
"In fact, I can imagine most monsters, once they’ve
lost about half their numbers, will say screw it and run away. It just
makes sense. Evil doesn’t usually place a lot of stock in honor and
fighting to protect their fellows." - Robert
Schwalb
Advancement
"Instead of the fighter getting a better and better
attack bonus, he instead gets more options to do stuff as he goes up in
level, and his attack bonus goes up at a very modest rate. I think it
offers a better play experience that the orc/ogre can remain in the
campaign, and people can know how the monster would work from a
previous experience, but they remain a challenge for longer." - Monte
Cook
Character advancement should go as fast as the group
wants it to go. Meaty rules in the DMs book to adjust that.
"Additionally,
we're looking at having the classes gradually layer in more
capabilities over the first two or three levels, rather than providing
a large number of class features at level 1, so that players new to the
class have a short period of time to learn the basics of their class
through play. Experienced players could simply start at 3rd level if
they want to leap right into a more advanced starting experience." - Rodney
Thompson.
Things don't scale so dramatically.
Makes equipment interesting for longer, monsters
challenging for longer.
Ablity scores don't advance as quickly.
Attack bonus scales less, so ability score means more.
"...we're
looking at a bounded accuracy system where accuracy (of everything,
from attacks to spells) does not automatically go up with level." - Rodney
Thompson.
Different reward options: monsters, quests, roleplaying.
Magic items
no longer part of essential progression mathematics.
"We're running with the idea that magic items are
special and not bound to character progression."
Magic items are possible, but difficult to create by
PCs.
Not balancing the classes based on the expectation of
magical items.
Castles
& Followers: "We can also have other options, like
building a castle, having followers and vassals. We can build that into
what high level characters get." - Monte
Cook.
0-Level
Play: "While I don't think level 0 play will be an assumed
part of the core game, I think it's perfectly viable as an optional
rules module. However, I'd also like to point out that themes do a lot
for creating the kinds of character history." - Rodney
Thompson.
Multiclassing:
"...here's what we have in mind. When you gain a level, you can choose
any class and gain a level in that class, much in the same way that it
functioned in 3rd Edition. Of course, those of you who play or played
3E know that there can sometimes be issues with this, and if you aren't
careful you can build a character that struggles with effectiveness at
higher levels. However, there's a lot of good that comes out of this
system, including organic character growth, expansive character
building options without the need for large swathes of material, and
the ability to express your character's specialties through a unique
mix of classes." - Rodney
Thompson.
"Another
thing we're looking at is the way we word certain abilities, making
sure that disparate classes work well together. For example, instead of
the fighter having to spend a single action to make multiple attacks,
we might say that the extra attacks that the fighter gains as he gains
levels are effectively free actions that the fighter takes on his turn.
Thus, if my fighter/wizard picked up an extra attack through his levels
of fighter, he might be able to cast a spell as his main action and
then still get his extra attack, giving him the benefit of all of his
class levels." - Rodney
Thompson.
Magic Items
- iconic. Flame-tongue, holy avenger, wand of wonder.
Cap on stat boosts from items.
Gauntlets of
ogre power exist.
No explicit power sources. Moving away from
jargon and keywords, towards natural language.
Skills
& Ability Scores: the "Reimagining
Skills & Ability Scores" seminar at DDXP
was very informative. Much of the info here came from that
seminar, but read the full transcript
for actual quotes.
"...ability
scores were the same old 16 (+3), so still 3e/4e stats. Attack
bonuses/AC were higher = better, so no THAC0." [source]
The idea is to make ability scores have a big influence.
Half-orc gets +1 STR. Fighter gets +1 STR.
Generally race gets a +1 bonus.
Basic is 4d6 drop the lowest for ability scores, but
other options available.
The DM can just say "yes, you have 17 STR, you burst
through the door" - getting past some of the mundane rolls and not tie
up game time with that. No roll to see if there's a gem in a jar, but
an INT roll to find a hidden compartment. Someone with 15 STR
can just jump over a pit with no roll.
[NEW
19 APRIL] Heraldry
mentioned as a skill. - D&D
Podcast
Skill
challenges - "I want them to die in a fire".
Complex skill checks within the narrative.
Describe actions, but can just make skill checks if you
want.
Encourages narrative ways of, say, crossing the pit,
rather than a simple skill check.
A class or theme might give a bonus to a skill, but no
actual skill list. DM calls for relevant ability score check,
and if you have a class or character feature that gives a bonus to that
action, you add it in. Makes possible for open-ended,
infinite set of specific flavorful micro-skills.
Easy to completely leave skills out of the game.
"Advantage" is something a DM can hand to a player who
uses a good description.
Option to roleplay and ignore ability scores.
A skill is essentially a notation to a stat.
For example, STR 15, and bonus to opening jam jars because
you're just really good at that particular thing.
"Some
characters had bonuses to certain actions, like the rogue being good at
bluffing, the wizard using arcana to detect magic/identify items, the
fighter kicking down doors left and right, and so forth. It seemed very
simple, almost ad-hoc..." [source]
Saving throws are
back.
They are ability checks.
CHA is linked to fear and charm effects.
Equipment
- making it a bit more important.
Moving from gold to silver standard.
"Gold is
the new platinum, and electrum is back. Electrum was explicitly found.
EL-ECT-RUM." [source]
Mundane wand is 100gp, like fighter's scale armor.
Weapons defined by categories not specific names.
You're good with all axes, swords, bows, for example.
Fighter doesn't find a cool axe but can't use it because he
didn't choose to be an axe guy - you're good at all weapons.
Accuracy and damage changes by weapon. Also
damage types (slashing/piercing, etc.).
"There
have been many times since the inception of 4E where we'd wished we had
some kind of damage type for physical damage, a point that was driven
home especially well when we did the design and development of the
Gamma World game, which does have a physical damage type. I think the
step that previous editions could have taken, but didn't, is to treat
slashing, bludgeoning, and piercing damage types just like acid, cold,
fire, etc. damage. That way, weapon users get a few more interesting
choices in the weapons they wield, just like spellcasters have when
making spell selection" - Rodney
Thompson.
Weapon specialization benefits - some are like at-will
attacks.
"Weapons
were mostly similar, but proficiency bonuses seem back. We didn't
really get to look at a list or anything. Simple/Martial split, light
weapons were mentioned. I'm thinking a 3e/4e hybrid for weapons. Never
saw any reach weapons... damage types did seem back but I can't be
sure." [source]
[NEW
19 APRIL] "One area where we might make some tweaks is
trying to level the playing
field on a lot of common weapons, because for many players, a weapon is
an aesthetic choice, and it's kind of a drag to pick a weapon for
aesthetic reasons only to find out your character is somehow hampered
because you didn't make another, less aesthetically pleasing choice.
Also, yes, right now we're looking at typing weapon damage, just like
we do with spell damage. So, a mace might do 1d8 bludgeoning damage,
for example." - Rodney
Thompson
Crafting:
"The goal is to make sure the rules for crafting things are present,
and that you can opt into being a craftsman if you want as a player,
but that doing so doesn't consume a significant portion of the
resources you need for adventuring. We've tinkered with putting it in
themes, for example, as a benefit that you just get." - Rodney
Thompson
Combat:
Gridded
combat in core rulebook.
But as an optional module.
"Right
now, the design of the game does not assume by default that you are
using a battlemat and miniatures when adjudicating combat, and as such
we feel confident that spells like cone
of cold could be cones, and lightning bolt
could be a line, without having too many problems. However, when we
present the rules for using a grid for combat, we're going to want to
present ways to convert those spells into the more grid-friendly areas
like bursts and blasts. We can also present the grid-based versions of
bursts, cones, lines, etc. found in the 3.5 Edition of the game.
Moreover, we don't even have to limit ourselves to a square grid, and
could present the rules for playing on a hex grid too, allowing each
group to determine what fits their needs best." - Rodney
Thompson
"...charging
kinda sucks. Extra damage, but you take a minus TO HIT as well as to
your defenses. Very risky." [source]
"Advantage" is something a DM can hand to a player who
uses a good description.
"...the
Rogue had "weapon finesse", but his damage was still Str-based. The
attack roll seemed to be mostly Strength + a hidden weapon proficiency
bonus, seemed to be +2 for everything+masterwork if any. It was
modifier based, not score based" [source]
Hit
Points/conditions/statuses: "Hit points are a great
example of an area of the game that we don't think needs any real
changes. They have remained consistent in their use throughout the
editions, and we think they are one of the touchstones of the game. We
might tinker with acquisition and recovery of hit points, but the basic
concept of hit points should remain unchanged." - Rodney
Thompson
"So talking about things like stun, daze, and immobilzed
right?
Currently we're in the area that the effect should be relevant to the
spell or power. For example there might be a power word stun spell that
explains what stun is and goes from there. But we're probably not going
to have too many abilities or spells that would do something like
that. We've pared down and increased the list of status
effects, back and forth."
Healing: "First, I
don’t think that clerics being the sole healers is something I’d
consider a common trait of D&D throughout the ages; the bard
and the druid classes were both capable healers in previous editions.
Though the cleric was arguably the best healer in certain editions,
others could fill that role; 4E just went further and standardized
healing mechanisms between all healing classes. As I mentioned in the
first question above, we also think there should be some self-healing
or non-magical healing." - Rodney
Thompson.
"This
is a great
example of where we can offer lots of options to create the kinds of
games that any individual DM and his or her players want to play. Want
to run a game where players are always healed up to full hit points
between fights? No problem; we’ve got rules for that. Want to run a
game that is super-deadly with disposable characters? We can do that
too, just by tweaking things like hit points, availability of self
healing, and so forth." - Rodney
Thompson.
"...at
level 1 most characters had about 15 HP" [source]
"-
Con score = ded. You make a Con save to avoid dying. Fail, lose 1d6 HP.
Make 3 and you stabilize. So, make, fail, fail, make, make, you're
stable but down 2d6. Makes being dying kinda tense." [source]
"Ohh,
resting. You get 4 rests per day; 2 short 10-minute ones, a 1-hour one,
and an 8-hour one. 10-minutes give you back your level in HP, the
1-hour lets you get back 1/2 your hp OR re-prep some spells (one or the
other, caster-bitches!), while an 8-hour gives you back both 1/2 HP and
all your spells. There were no healing surges in sight." [source]
"Criticals
were 4e/3e hybrids; roll a 20, do max damage AND roll to confirm. On a
success, extra damage equal to your class' HD; rogue 1d6, fighter 1d10,
etc." [source]
Critical
Fumbles/Injuries: "Those are two great examples of things
that probably wouldn't be core assumptions, but could live as modules,
albeit in a core book." - Rodney
Thompson.
Reaction/Interrupt
Actions: "...off-turn actions are one of the primary
sources of game play slowdown—not simply in their resolution, but in
the player's need to keep them in his or her mind all the time... Going
forward, I think we'll want to address the challenges associated with
off-turn actions in a couple of different ways. First, I think we'll
want to be more cautious with how many we inject into the game. In
order to retain the benefits of the "active defense" side of off-turn
actions, we can look to saving throws as a method of providing that
feeling, and then build mechanics that ride on top of the saving throw
if the player chooses them." - Rodney
Thompson.
"5e
halflings seem faster than 3e ones, but slower than 4e ones (25 feet/5
squares), while armor appears to slow you down less (scale only slows
you down by 5 feet it seems, not 10)." [source]
Classes
Class
Design: the class
design seminar at DDXP was very informative. A lot
of info on this page came from that seminar, but read the full
transcript
for actual quotes from Monte Cook, Bruce Cordell, and Robert Schwalb.
Class list:
"The goal at the moment is to include all the classes that were in the
first PH style book for each edition." Specifically mentioned
by WotC staff so far are: fighter,
cleric, wizard, warlock, bard, paladin, psion, barbarian, monk, druid,
warlord.
Different classes should have different levels of
complexity. But also varying levels of complexity within each
class. Even the wizard has a base starting point that is less complex
than what you can get into if you opt into some of the options.
"We definitely want the classes to be balanced, though
having things exactly mathematically balanced isn't always the goal. If
the fighter is 100% damage for example, then maybe this other class is
80% damage/combat and 20% exploration."
No class is mandatory. But some are desireable
(cleric in an undead campaign, druid in a nature campaign).
3E-style multiclassing.
Classes still have important ability scores, but there's
room for the charismatic fighter.
Classes give you bonuses like race does (e.g. a cleric
gets a WIS bonus).
Common or
uncommon classes. So for example fighters,
clerics, wizards and clerics might be commmon while warlocks, bards,
and paladins fall into uncommon and something like the assassin might
be rare. Some of the classes labeled rare might be a bit more
complex or difficult to pick up.
Character creation 15 mins for experienced players, 30
mins for a new player.
"What we're really getting at is that character
creation should take as long as you want. If you want to jump into a
game quickly, you can put together an easy character and not worry
about too many of those options. But if you want to build the more
complex character and go through the options and tweak it to be exactly
what you want, then you have the time and options for that."
Themes& Backgrounds:
themes
cover potion-makers and blacksmiths.
Like kits from 2E. You can improve in that theme with feats
etc. Or you can use skills and feats to customize your own
theme.
Themes such as commoner, noble, knight, apprentice.
Also planetouched, deva, avenger. There is one called "pub
crawler". So you can have an avenger themed paladin.
Themes tie into open-ended skill system - skills for
specific themes.
"Our
current plan is to condense skill and feat choices into two
choices: background and theme. Background tells you where you came
from, who you were, and what you are trained to do. Your background
gives you a set of skills, specific tasks, areas of knowledge, or
assets a character of that background ought to have. The thief
background gives you Pick Pockets, Stealth, Streetwise, and Thieves’
Cant. The soldier background gives you Endurance, Intimidate, Survival,
and an extra language. We want your abilities to carry the weight of
basic task resolution, so these skills improve your chances when you
perform tasks related to them or just let you do something, such as
cook a meal, speak Goblin, or run for twice as long as the next person.
Where background speaks to the skills you possess, your theme describes
how you do the things you do. All fighters, for example, kick ass in
combat because they are fighters. A sharpshooter fighter is awesome
with ranged weapons while a slayer fighter dominates in hand-to-hand
combat. Your theme helps you realize a certain style, technique, or
flavor through the feats it offers. Each theme gives you several feats,
starting with the first one right out of the gate. As you gain levels,
your theme gives you additional feats that reflect the theme’s overall
character." - Monte
Cook.
Fighter
was the hardest class to design. Druid
second hardest. Monk easy.
"The
fighter is also the class that supports the
broadest spectrum of archetypes, from swordsman to archer." - Rodney
Thompson.
"I
will say my Fighter
was +X to hit, rolled dice a lot" - Dave
C. of Baldman Games (which runs
DDXP); this appears to confirm that + to hit remains, as opposed to
some other mechanic.
"So for example, if your fighter goes up a level and
would normally get some bonus damage or a bonus to hit, or something
simple, then maybe instead you could choose to replace that with an
option or options that allow you to do some cool moves that allow you
to push people around, or protect your allies a bit more, or control
the battlefield a little more."
Fighters have their version of abilities and options as
well, but it will have a different feel than the Vancian magic for
arcane stuff.
Monte
Cook: "For example, the basic game fighter might have
specific level-bases abilities. Things that every fighter has. If you
decide to get more customized, you can swap standard abilities for more
complex, optional abilities. These are the kinds of things that feats
do now. But the complex stuff is balanced with what's in the core. One
character is more complex, but not necessarily more powerful."
"...in
several editions the fighter's primary
mechanics are tightly tied to subsystems that, in the upcoming
iteration of D&D, might be optional or even absent. The 3rd
edition fighter gets a lot of bonus feats, but what if feats were an
optional subsystem? The 4th edition fighter derives much of its
mechanics from the powers system; what would the fighter look like if
powers were optional? In 4E, the fighter would be left with marking or
defender aura, but I would argue that the fighter's defender mechanics
are representative of a play style that should be available to many
different character archetypes, and not be the sole province of the
fighter." - Rodney
Thompson.
"Instead of the fighter getting a better and better
attack bonus, he instead gets more options to do stuff as he goes up in
level, and his attack bonus goes up at a very modest rate." - Monte
Cook.
"For
example, the fighter might be concerned
with things like the preservation of hit points, which not only
includes making strategic choices at character creation, but also might
involve managing a pool of self-healing resources, or using
defense-based options to mitigate damage while still occupying an
enemy's attention (thus also mitigating the damage that enemy could do
to the fighter's allies)." - Rodney
Thompson
"I
mentioned that the fighter could
serve the need for a low complexity class, and also have options to
serve the needs of those who want a high complexity class." - Rodney
Thompson
"For
example, if you substitute maneuvers in for individual attacks, the
fighter class plays more like a mix-and-match system combining
maneuvers and multiple attacks; on my turn, I charge the orc, then use
my next attack to disarm him, and my final attack to push him back away
from the weapon he dropped." - Rodney
Thompson.
"...our
current vision for both the fighter and the rogue includes access to a
system of combat maneuvers." - Rodney
Thompson.
"...instead
of the fighter having to spend a single action to make multiple
attacks, we might say that the extra attacks that the fighter gains as
he gains levels are effectively free actions that the fighter takes on
his turn." - Rodney
Thompson
Psion,
wild talents exist. As do rituals.
Barbarian: fits
with what some of us are familiar with, he rages and can take lots
and lots of damage and deal out lots of damage.
Cleric:
has an interesting mix of healing and other options. Cleric getting
back to the cleric of 1E that fights with a mace and shield and gets
his party back up.
Core is Vancian (like Wizard).
"I
don't think 'requiring someone to be a healer' is a sacred cow, but
having healers in the game is. I wouldn't want to see D&D do
away with healing, but I don't think there's anything keeping us from
exploring a version of D&D where players can simply play
anything they want, ignoring concepts like role and function when
putting together their party. To do so, we would need to take a serious
look at
the way player resources are allocated in D&D, and make some
adjustments to the assumptions behind the design of everything from
adventures to encounters to monsters." - Rodney
Thompson.
"...the
cleric was very, VERY adept at stabilizing people, like,
move-attack-YOUARENOTDYING good at it." [source]
"Seemed
like standard low-level 2e/3e fair, cure wounds, bless, etc. Nothing
huge, fancy, or off-the-wall." [source]
Mike
Mearls discusses turning undead in this
column: "When a cleric attempts to turn the undead, he or she
makes a Charisma check (presumably with a bonus based on cleric
level—maybe +1 per 2 levels?). All the undead within a 30-foot cone in
front of the cleric are subject to the turn attempt. Each undead
creature has a turn DC embedded in its description. If the cleric
succeeds against a creature, the creature suffers the effects described
alongside its turn DC. If the check fails, the cleric's attempts to
turn that specific creature automatically fail for the next 24 hours.
This approach places the effects related to a turn attempt within the
individual creature's description, which allows DMs and designers to
determine what happens when you turn a specific type of undead monster."
"I like the literal idea of turning, as in turning away
the undead from the cleric rather than blasting them with holy energy."
- Mike
Mearls.
Warlord:
"The one we saw was very
charisma-based, lowish strength, but very 4e in basic function;
initiative bonuses and granting free attacks to others that did extra
damage, presumably by pointing out how very stabbable faces are."
[source]
Wizard:
Vancian magic is core. Other options for other classes, but wizard
and cleric are Vancian.
[NEW
19 APRIL] Six
spells per level in the "basic" game. - D&D
Podcast
Wizards have magical feats that are basically at will
abilities. Wizards have magical feats (at-will, always available). Hold
on to higher spells until needed.
Fireball is a static 5d6. If you want more damage, you
use a higher-level spell slot.
"...there's
no reason why, in addition to Vancian spellcasting for
wizards and other classes, we couldn't explore alternatives. If we've
done our job right, we can provide rules for spell points or some other
spellcasting system, or maybe several other spellcasting systems if we
need to. A goal for the game is to make it as modular as possible while
still maintaining a baseline of classic D&D fantasy, and part
of
that modularity can include alternatives to mechanics presented in the
baseline. We also know that there are elements of non-Vancian magic
systems that would be a good idea to incorporate into a Vancian wizard;
at-will spells are a piece of game tech that doesn't fit in the classic
Vancian model, but that we know is both popular with players and also
helps reinforce the wizard as a representative of the master-of-magic
archetype." - Rodney
Thompson.
Rituals are there for the really big spells that are
super awesome, but might take a bit longer to cast.
Spell
Components - limited to rituals only. Rare components as
quests.
Feats cover at-will abilities. Wizard has javelin of fire
at-will feat ability.
"Magic
seems Vancian, with spells leveled 1 to 10. Yes, no 0 spells on the
sheet, but the bar clearly went to 10." [source]
"The
wizard had some type of at-will magic attack, rinky-dink spell, and a
very limited Vancian-style pool of prepared spells. Casting spells was
a mishmash of 4e and 3e, opposed attacks vs rolled defense, with the
attacker setting the DC with a roll and the defender rolling against
that." [source]
"Magic
Missile just plain hit. It was either 1d4+1 or 1d6+1 I think,
BUT, it was definitely 2 missiles." [source]
"...an
at-will scorching ray type deal, some daily magic missile-age, mage
armor... the basic stuff really." [source]
Rogue: "...our current
vision for both the fighter and the rogue includes access to a system
of combat maneuvers." - Rodney
Thompson.
"The
rogue in the current playtest document has sneak attack, and it’s a
combination of the 3rd Edition and 4th Edition rules. The extra damage
as of right now goes all the way up to 10d6 at the highest levels, but
a rogue can use the damage against anybody. " - Robert
Schwalb.
"I’m
dancing around an idea, so I might as well come out and say it. Here it
is: Everyone in the game can backstab. Rogues, if they want, can be the
best at backstabbing." - Robert
Schwalb.
Settings
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. We 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." That would allow Wizards to take
advantage of a massive back catalog of products.
There are no current plans
that we know of for other settings - we assume these will follow in
later years.
"Just
as fans like different mechanics and
styles of play, so too do they like lots of settings. We’re making
plans to ensure that your setting of choice is incorporated into our
plans, but right now it’s too early to go into specifics." - Mike
Mearls.
On timelines: "I
can't give a specific answer to that. We know there are things that
people like and dislike about different timelines in the various
settings. If there's information that's part of the canon, it still
happened. We won't tell people in what time period to play in." - Mike
Mearls.
Other Settings:
"The stories and worlds of past editions of D&D are
just as important to our development and ideas for D&D Next as
the rules and other information is. I don't have any more information
to share at this time, but we're definitely exploring and excited about
what we have planned." - Mike
Mearls.
Art
A video game art
studio from
China has been hired to fully detail the Realms.
The
Future of Dungeons & Dragons
by D&D's Senior Art Director, Jon Schindehette (who will also
be writing some articles for DDI "to talk about the creative process
involved with the creation of D&D, and the art and artists of Dungeons & Dragons"
starting in February).
"...in
the last two editions if you look at the art, I think you'll see a lot
of characters that look like super heroes. They all look like they've
been to the gym recently, they don't have backpacks for traveling
through the dungeon - the guys are well shaven. In our recent art we've
added a more diverse, modular approach - you've got people that look
vastly different. You'll have the halfling who's a bit overweight with
some food stains on his clothes along side the more heroic look dashing
sort." - Jeremy
Crawford
"Art
should tell the story of D&D. Show you a scene that looks like
it's an adventure." - Mike
Mearls.
Articles
The
following articles all deal with the new D&D game; several
of the
below writers were present at a "D&D Summit" where they
playtested an early development version of the game under an NDA:
The
following articles cover the DDXP playtests and seminars:
weem has used modern art software to
recreate the Caves
of Chaos adventure map. The
Caves of Chaos is part of the classic adventure Keep on the Borderlands
used by WotC for the D&D Next playtests at DDXP.
Initial
Impressions of the New D&D is an article at Critical
Hits which - well, it does what it says on the box. Based on the
playtests.
Running
the New D&D and Playing Games is a companion article
to the above piece; it also covers some of the non-D&D content
at DDXP, such as Magic: The Gathering and Marvel Heroic
Roleplaying.
DDXP
2012 Recap (This Is My Game) has some general impressions of
the playtest, plus some non-D&D Next content.
My
first look at D&D Next (D&D The Fifth Column)
- "First, the prototype of D&D Next absolutely captures the
feel of classic D&D. Since I started with the Moldvay Basic Set
in 1980, to me the game felt very much like Basic D&D–but there
were elements which I knew would resonate with someone for whom 1e was
the baseline. Talking with one of my traveling companions, who had
played mostly 3.x, I found that he had gravitated to parts of the new
system that evoked the feel of 3rd edition."
These
articles are reactions
to the news - some in places you wouldn't expect to see it, which gives
us the impression that WotC has really reached out to the mainstream
audience:
"We'll have more information
on the GSL as it relates to the next edition in the near future.
Personally, I have a copy of 'The Cathedral & the Bazaar' on
the shelf at work From my days as a programmer and as a freelance RPG
designer, the bulk of my work involved open platforms which did a lot
for a game that relies so much on individual creativity." - Mike
Mearls.
"And
although of course
no one can possibly speak with actual authority
of the future on this topic, I can assure you that the OGL issues that
plagued 4th Edition's release are lessons that did not go unheeded." - Bruce
Cordell.
"I
think that an open license speaks to how
people think about D&D, and in some ways it is a big part of
the game’s culture. We want people to feel like we’re making an effort
to include everything that they love about the game, and we’re
exploring options for third party publishers." - Mike
Mearls.
What
of 4E and DDI?
No solid information yet.
"We plan to continue
offering people access to tools like the D&D Character Builder
and the D&D Monster Builder to support 4th edition. We're also
exploring ideas for conversion tools so that some of the 4th
edition
characters and content will be playable with the next edition." - Mike
Mearls.
"At
this point our plans are to continue to provide support to 4E
characters in the character builder." - Mike
Mearls.
Other
Items
DDI
Virtual Table: "We also designed the tool with the
flexibility to support integration with tools, stat-blocks, and skins
for all editions of D&D, including future ones." - Rory
Madden (producer for Game Table Online, the company making
the Virtual Table for DDI)
PDFs/Digital:
"We're definitely looking into the digital options and we want to find
ways to get that product to people, but we need to make sure we find
what what's best for you and for Wizards. When we have more information
we'll be sharing it." - Mike
Mearls.
Errata:
"We're working on a better process for errata, and we hope very much to
not have as much errata in D&D Next." - Mike
Mearls.
Polls
EN World is holding occasional polls to guage your opinion on various
aspects of the upcoming game. The polls are listed below:
All the latest EN World
official reviews, columns, and subscriber articles here.
Don't have your subscription yet? It's only $3 a month and you can grab
it right
here!
Please Visit Our Sponsors
weem
