Where do you see (or want) 5.0 to go?

[I'm A Banana]

A return to the dungeon.

By that, I mean, a return to the dungeon as the basic element of gameplay.

Most of 3e and all of 4e specifies the encounter as the basic element of gameplay. Encounters are designed in detail, and played out in detail (especially combat encounters). Encounters are what you need resources for, and what consumes resources. Encounters are where you do things that need to be done. Encounters are where you play the game.

In 5e, it will be the dungeon (or the wilderness path, or the plot of the assassin, or whatever other discrete point-a-to-point-b mission you want to think of). We'll still have encounters, but, for instance, HP (healing surges, whatever) will only return after you complete the dungeon, and each encounter will be one bit of the overall dungeon, and the dungeon will also be made of non-encounters: traps, obstacles, scenery, NPC's, whatnot. Choices that the PC's make will become more important in action, rather than at character creation: it is important to decide what path to take out of this room, to try Door A or Door B, it is not (as) important to pick the right power, or the right race.

This will pull the game back a little bit from combat. Big setpiece combats will still be prominent, but your party will also have resources to face things that aren't combats -- divinations and spying for determining which choice is the right choice, resources for recovering from bad choices, etc. These "noncombat things" will directly be the dungeon itself trying to kill your characters, or otherwise make them fail.

Dungeons will award treasure, and XP, not encounters. Instead of 10 encounters, it'll be 3 dungeons to gain a level. You will have powers of exploration, and interpersonal skills, based on your class and race, to solve the problems dungeons create, rather than just the problems combats create.

As a result, some things will get more abstract. Race will be more of a "template" to lay on top of your class. Your class will be more fluid. You won't be "locked in" from 1-30. It will probably change to 1-15 (plus prestige class?). Combat will not be as specific. One square one way or the other will not matter. Opportunity Attacks will be dropped, and minor tactical foibles like flanking and combat advantage will be made abstract.

The game will be made to play on the computer from Day 1, with a gametable, and a way to find groups online, and a way to set them up. WotC will sponsor online tournament play a la the RPGA, and will also develop adventures through this medium. It will still be possible to play on the tabletop, and there will still be "core books" printed, but "splat books" and modules might be mostly online supplements. The core books will be rarer, but bigger, collectors' items, and might come after the online versions (after the bugs have been mostly worked out).

If they want to be really interesting, they'll make it the Final Edition, with a continually evolving and expanding ruleset full of individual bits that DM's can assemble in their own campaigns, but I'm not so sure they can envision what that would look like.

I think I would like it like that. Specifically, the return to seeing the dungeon as the key element of play would address, I think, 90% of my problems with 4e.

And the other 10% might be solved by not hiring enthusiastic 13 year olds to write the names of things.

 

[Stormonu]

For starters, I think 4E is here for a while, at least the base engine is. The whole concept of simple rules with a pile of exceptions has made for a game that is easy to learn, easy to teach. It has never been easier to get someone to try out a D&D game than it has been with this edition. The rules aren't daunting, the character builder is a stroke of genius, and the DDI subscription model provides a revenue stream for a long time to come.

Wizards will take that 4E engine, and plug in new games (e.g. Gamma World is the first big test of this, perhaps followed by Boot Hill, Dragonlance -- as it's own game, etc.) Each of those games will be refinements of the 4E concept, much like Star Wars SAGA was to 3.5... but at it's core, 4E is here for a while.

At least that's what my crystal ball says.

Careful, I think you may drool on yourself there

I have to respectfully disagree; I don't think 4E is the simplest - I would give that honor to BECM D&D, but 4E would probably be 2nd.

 

[Lancelot]

Well, whatever complains about 4e, mechanically, now is what 5e will fix. Better maths, better ritual rules and perhaps faster combat since I noticed alot of complaints on combat length.

This sums it up for me.

4e is my preferred version, but there are things that I'd like to see addressed in 5e.

• Faster combats, even if they're more lethal. I'm not saying a return to the days of save-or-die, but I'd support fewer monster HP and more monster damage.

• Better maths behind Skill Challenges and Hit Probabilities. My experience is that "typical" (non-optimized) PCs struggle to hit some targets once they start hitting paragon levels - especially if the party is lacking a leader.

• A much broader and more easily usable list of rituals in the core rulebooks. I actually like the way rituals work in 4e (rare, expensive, and slow to cast), but it frustrates me that I have to look in 10 different books to get a wide selection. I'd prefer a sizable chapter, or even a separate splatbook, that consolidated a goodly number of attractive and usable rituals. Maybe even including some "combat rituals" that may take more than 1 round to cast ("Protect the wizard while he prepares to banish the demon!"), but have significant effects.

 

[kmdietri]

I know I'm probably in the minority, but I'd love to see 5th being a hybrid of all the best stuff of 3.5 and 4E.

 

[Festivus]

Careful, I think you may drool on yourself there

I have to respectfully disagree; I don't think 4E is the simplest - I would give that honor to BECM D&D, but 4E would probably be 2nd.

I'll bite. I have to be honest, I dusted off my AD&D PHB and DMG to read for fun, and when presented with the multitude of tables and charts and whatnot... well, I used to fully understand it but now I just get the deer in headlights.

But you are referring to Basic D&D, right? I did recently run a game of Basic Fantasy RPG and found it remarkably light and easy to work with, as well as teach people how to play. Perhaps I should see if I can find a copy of Basic D&D to read through to refresh my memory of how it works before making such statements.

 

[Stormonu]

I'll bite. I have to be honest, I dusted off my AD&D PHB and DMG to read for fun, and when presented with the multitude of tables and charts and whatnot... well, I used to fully understand it but now I just get the deer in headlights.

But you are referring to Basic D&D, right? I did recently run a game of Basic Fantasy RPG and found it remarkably light and easy to work with, as well as teach people how to play. Perhaps I should see if I can find a copy of Basic D&D to read through to refresh my memory of how it works before making such statements.

Yeah, Basic. My wife is trying to put together a game for our sons (6 & 9 years old) because they can't play in my Sunday game with the 18-20 year olds. I pulled out my copy of the 86' (Elmore cover) basic game and gave it to her to go with over the boys. 4E was over their heads, but they seem to be able to grasp the basic game.

 

[rgard]

I'd be happy if they subtracted 1.5

 

[Truth Seeker]

Hmmm, last verison touched was Eberron 3.5.

Now using Pathfinder 3.5R(evised).

Have no need for a '5.0'.

It's a long way off, but I was just curious on what people's thoughts are.

5.0 isn't going to go Pathfinder, 'cause Pathfinder went there. A lot of the DM stuff from 4.0 will probably stick around. Mechanically, I can see it heading more along the path of SW SAGA but keeping much of the same power and skill structure.

Or I can see WotC going in a new direction, taking ideas from previous systems and applying them in a new manner. It'll still be some form of D20, though.

 

[lutecius]

I'd like 5e to be more intuitive and flexible and generally less gamist.

If they keep the power system, it should be point-based, rather than per encounter or daily, especially for martial classes.
Powers and marks should never require refluffing or convoluted justifications. They should make sense in game by default.
ie. no more [hit target = unrelated effects] and I want immunities (or at least resistances) back when appropriate.

I want hps and combat to be less abstract than in earlier editions. The bloodied condition was a nice addition, healing surges not so much.
And I hope 5e picks up the ball where the 4e designers dropped it and finally implements armor as damage reduction.

I also want 3e-style multiclassing back and classes to be generally less relevant (no more roles). As 4e reversed some of the changes made in 3e, I think it's entirely possible to get rid of some 4e innovations.

But I doubt 5e will go this way. Implementing any of the changes I mentioned in a balanced way would probably require more work and playtesting than wotc is willing to put in.

5.0 isn't going to go Pathfinder, 'cause Pathfinder went there.

more importantly, PF was meant to be backward-compatible. new editions are not

Though I haven't actually played beyond making a character, I'd like to see it go the route WFRP 3 went

god, no

I know I'm probably in the minority, but I'd love to see 5th being a hybrid of all the best stuff of 3.5 and 4E.

the problem is no one will agree on what the best stuff is.

 

[S'mon]

1) I wouldn't want it until at least 2016, 8 years is the absolute minimum for a substantial revision.

2) I'd like a basically cleaned-up 4e that simplifies the combat rules - I spent another hour last night trying to grok how opportunity action & immediate interrupt work and interact in regards to a Fighter's Combat Superiority (an OA) and Mark/Challenge (an II) class features, for the PC I'll be playing on 4th April. I'd want it to maintain substantial backwards compatibility with most 4e books beyond the core III such as Monster Manual II, adventures, Adventurer's Vault etc.

Another major revision in the near future and I would ignore it and either stick with 4e or possibly commit to Pathfinder.