Monte Cook back at wizards

[UngainlyTitan]

Nah. Monte did a quick review of the rules, and wrote a foreword. That's all - and that's really not much. Pathfinder was sold largely on the reputation for quality that Paizo had built up for their adventures.



Serious, yes, but survivable. Whereas the alternative is dropping Pathfinder and tying the survival of the company into a license that they don't control. And, having dropped Pathfinder they wouldn't be able to restart it if WotC pulled the rug out from under them.

I just can't see them taking that step.

I cannot either. It has been a while since i read the OGL but I assume that Pathfinder is OGL, since it is built on an OGL chassis. So abandonning Pathfinder also risks someone else coming in and carrying the torch. Then they would be at the mercy of the Wizards licence and have the new OGL champion snapping at their heels.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

I really like the 4e philosophy on game play (i.e. the game should be fun for everyone regardless of class or level) more than any previous edition and I hope Mike Mearls and Monte Cook don't screw it up.

Didn't you hear? Mike Mearls ruined everything.

 

[Shemeska]

This will be interesting. Assuming that they're now (or have been for a while) working on a 5e, they're in a really awkward position regarding what sort of thing to release to try to reclaim anything resembling their previous era market share.

If they release something more in line with pre-4e design notions, will they regain much of the 3.x crowd that either went with PF or never stopped playing 3.x? The ship may have sailed there unless they reverse course hard and gut many of the 4e'isms. Yet if they do that they risk starting Nerd Rage War II and having the people who didn't like 3.x and adore 4e feeling betrayed - and based on comments over on the WotC forums a number of people are already lighting torches and grabbing pitchforks in the event that WotC "backslides".

Mind you, this doesn't really impact me much. I've got a preferred edition that I play, which WotC doesn't make, so the route they go has little influence on my gaming at this juncture. Yet if anyone could find a solution for WotC that doesn't involve them losing even more of a market they splintered, Monte could, assuming he would have the creative freedom to abandon things that failed to gain traction in the RPG marketplace regardless of internal feelings at WotC about some of those design elements. It'll be difficult if not impossible.

Would be hard to get my money though, unless for instance they gave Monte a budget and let him do a 5e Planescape true to the original setting, its metaplot and design elements without having to adhere to 4e PoL at all. Yeah, that I'd throw money at WotC for.

 

[Incenjucar]

5E would go about as well as the 3DS right about now, at best, so if he's working on it, it's too many years off to be worth focusing on right now.

I would absolutely adore Monte getting to bring Planescape back in all its glory - ideally, utilizing the bulk of the old material while making room for the PoL folks to play - Portals fix almost everything. Just having fresh rules for the old ideas would be fantastic.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

This will be interesting. Assuming that they're now (or have been for a while) working on a 5e, they're in a really awkward position regarding what sort of thing to release to try to reclaim anything resembling their previous era market share.

If they release something more in line with pre-4e design notions, will they regain much of the 3.x crowd that either went with PF or never stopped playing 3.x? The ship may have sailed there unless they reverse course hard and gut many of the 4e'isms. Yet if they do that they risk starting Nerd Rage War II and having the people who didn't like 3.x and adore 4e feeling betrayed - and based on comments over on the WotC forums a number of people are already lighting torches and grabbing pitchforks in the event that WotC "backslides".

Mind you, this doesn't really impact me much. I've got a preferred edition that I play, which WotC doesn't make, so the route they go has little influence on my gaming at this juncture. Yet if anyone could find a solution for WotC that doesn't involve them losing even more of a market they splintered, Monte could, assuming he would have the creative freedom to abandon things that failed to gain traction in the RPG marketplace regardless of internal feelings at WotC about some of those design elements. It'll be difficult if not impossible.

Would be hard to get my money though, unless for instance they gave Monte a budget and let him do a 5e Planescape true to the original setting, its metaplot and design elements without having to adhere to 4e PoL at all. Yeah, that I'd throw money at WotC for.

Seems to me like the most likely result of a 5e that tried to split the difference between 3.x/PF and 4e is that it would A) not please the retro crowd, B) not please the 3.x/PF people as it would still be quite different from classic D&D, and C) wouldn't please the 4e crowd because it would be losing too much. I think it would be the death of WotC D&D frankly.

I'm just wondering though what Monte Cook can do for 4e? Be a PR person I guess? Not sure how far that can go without his name anywhere on the game. Write 5e? That's clearly years in the future. Even 2013 is really pushing it. You can only make me buy so many books in so many years and switch game systems so many times...

In terms of what he can do with 4e? The things that discourage many people from 4e aren't things that can be fixed WITHIN 4e, so no huge rules revamps are really going to happen because you can't accomplish enough that way and have a 4e compatible game. Adventures? Well, surely they don't need to hire the guy for that, but they could. The thing is they already know how to write good adventures, they just need to DO it. Logan Bonner has written excellent 4e adventures for instance.

So what exactly can Monte Cook do for WotC? I am not sure I get it. Maybe it is just throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks....

 

[Incenjucar]

WotC has recently lacked creative ambition, so it's possible that he can jump start things there. Who knows, maybe he'll push for elemental classes.

*cough*

 

[Kzach]

WotC has recently lacked creative ambition, so it's possible that he can jump start things there.

Please explain. I'd really like to hear how you can justify that statement given all the material that's come out just in the last six months.

 

[Incenjucar]

Please explain. I'd really like to hear how you can justify that statement given all the material that's come out just in the last six months.

Much of it being variations of material that has already been released in some form, or variations on an existing concept that is already more or less covered. What new ground has been tread is often done in the barest way possible - vampires being the poster children of this.

That's not to say that the material is BAD, but it's not ambitious. WotC's curveballs have all been in packaging or promotions, rather than in game ideas.

 

[Vaeron]

I doubt 5e is coming anytime very soon, and think it would be a horrible mis-step if it does.

I don't think a 5e, closer to 3e or 2e or any e, would do much to help WotC at this point. Every revision/new edition/modification they've released from 3.0 to 3.5 to 4e to 4e Essentials has split and divided their fanbase. A lot of people just don't trust Wizards any more. 3.0 lasted only 3 years. 3.5 lasted only 5. 4e thus far has lasted 3 (the same length of 3.0's entire run). Those who believe Essentials was pretty much an update and revision of 4e would probably argue 4.0 only lasted 2 years.

Having developed a reputation as a company that abandons systems quickly, it's in WotC's best interest for several reasons not to do so this time, and instead make 4e the best game it can be.

I guess the bottom line for many is that they are, at this point, very suspicious of WotC, and not certain if they can trust them enough to invest heavily in a product line that might be defunct in just a couple years. Even a lot of gamers who continue to love what is released for 4e will say that the original PHB and DMG are now pretty much defunct. (I happen to disagree, as my gaming group does not use the updates or errata and our game hasn't suffered at all because of it).

If WotC carted out another new edition, whether they call it 5e or whatever, anytime within the next 3 years it will just cement in a lot of people's minds (and clearly I'm one of them) that they're only interested in selling new books. This is of course what businesses do. But business also need to please their customers, and continually abandoning product lines people have spent hundreds of dollars on is not the way to do that.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

No, the best way to handle it for WotC would be supporting 4e with few new things, and supporting a new 5th edition or a something more "retro" which bases of 4e but with a more modular system.

Wizards would be fools, if they decide to pull the plug and actually stop supporting the online tools.
As long as 4e is supported, they actually should do a 5e ASAP.
Not an edition that should please everyone, but an edition that allows for a different kind of playstyles... and I would not try to bring back the pathfinder crowd. People who want something more similar to ADnD are a much better target IMHO.
I am sure there are a lot of people playing pathfinder and 4e who would instantly switch if such a system will exist. (Or even better: no need to switch, as your DDI account allows you to get material for both games.)

Nearly all of those articles my Mike Mearls in the las 8 month were fantastic. He had great ideas, pointed out problems, pointed out how problems in the system were overcome by roleplaying.
Give me an edition based on d20 that incorporates those design principles, and I would actually play it.
Just to make sure: feat and talents need to be different design spaces, as someone said in a different thread, I would however like them to be called combat and non-combat proficiencies!



@WotC only wanting to sell books: they need to do that, and the best way to do it is creating the best D&D experience ever, and if that means two parallel editions side by side, so be it.