Mongoose's "State of the Mongoose"

[Treebore]

I tend to run very long games, going to high, sometimes very high, levels. So when 5E does come out, because it is coming, it is only a question of when, to draw me to it it will have to answer one problem. Scaling a game form low to high level, within a world, and have it make intuitive sense. Meaning everyone needs to look at what they come up with and be able to say, "Yeah, I can see it working that way."

Why can you be first level, and all the 40th level (What is that called in 4E? Been too long since I've played. Paragon?) haven't already done something to make a first level unneeded?

Also, there are still some major headaches in how the power scales up, even in 4E. Some hard rules need to be decided upon, and more importantly, have them make sense in a world, or worlds, that we all pretend are real.

Essentially they need to come up with some "Laws of Physics" that work for worlds of magic.

They even come close to pulling this off, I'll be back on board with 5E. Or if its still too complicated for me, I'll at least steal the Laws of Physics they come up with. Which will require my buying at least the core to be able to apply it to my gaming.

 

[Mercurius]

Hmm...not sure I'd say this is "calling it:" we think it possible that D&D 5e may be appearing in 2013.

I like that non-committal "possible" and "may." It seems like he wants to get credit if it is 2013, but doesn't want to commit to it.

But I do agree with this notion - I've been saying 2013 for a year or two now, although 2014 is also quite likely. 2013 is five years - that's a solid chunk of time, especially in the age of ever-increasing information flow and "time inflation." 2013 is a good year, and it doesn't take anything away from the 40-year anniversary possibilities. They can still do something like release commemorative printings of previous editions.

 

[scourger]

When 5e arrives, I hope they will take steps to recapture me & other lapsed players. After playing all editions since 1980, I've largely skipped 4e. We played some of the intro module with the pre-gens. I purchased 2 4e modules. And, I bought the core & 2 expansions of Gamma World. That's it. I've looked into 4e Essentials, but it just doesn't appeal enough even to get into the core game for me.

So, here is what they could do to make 5e more appealing to me. First, keep it simple. The core books are 3: PHB, DMG & MM. It would be even better if they released a single core book with everything needed to play, like the Rules Cyclopedia or Savage Worlds. A few hundred pages is really enough to cover the core game. And please keep the magic as concise as possible. Afterward, print all the supplements you want but keep those optional. And, don't take things that are really core to the game and put them in the supplements.

Second, and related, is to keep it true to its roots. For example, the core classes are fighter, magic user, cleric & thief. Races are human, dwarf, elf & halfling. There are 6 stats, AC & hit points. A finite selection of skills & feats is manageable, but there are differences in the niches that each class fills. Magic missile always hits, spellcasters run out of spells, and fighters run out of hit points.

Third, make it easy to play. Offer me tools that I can use to make it as instantly playable as possible. The painted minis with stat cards from the d20 era were the best for me. I have a duffel bag full of them, and I wish I had bought a whole lot more. And even then I really want to use the simplified DDM stats in my game. The 4e minis are OK, and I like the simpler powers for the foes; but I haven't been motivated to get a bunch of them so that I can run a new version of the game. Counters are also good, and modules are great.

I think WotC missed a big opportunity for this kind of development when they did not follow through with publishing the D&D Ravenloft game. It was announced as a sort of successor to Gamma World to be developed in the same way. For us, Gamma World broke down because the players did not have a lot of choice or the opportunity to min/max their character builds. As a DM, I loved the simplicity of the streamlined 4e derived rules, but the game needed more robust & distinct player character options. As with 4e, it seemed like every character had the same game effect just with different trappings. I really would have liked to have seen the Ravenloft game, and I hope they will take some of that direction for 5e.

 

[I'm A Banana]

SOMETHING is going on in those towers. What, exactly, it is, Sprange may not know any more than the rest of us. It would be an interesting time to be a fly on the wall of WotC, that's for sure.

 

[Psikus]

I've looked into 4e Essentials, but it just doesn't appeal enough even to get into the core game for me.
(...)
Second, and related, is to keep it true to its roots. For example, the core classes are fighter, magic user, cleric & thief. Races are human, dwarf, elf & halfling. There are 6 stats, AC & hit points. A finite selection of skills & feats is manageable, but there are differences in the niches that each class fills. Magic missile always hits, spellcasters run out of spells, and fighters run out of hit points.

I'm curious about what you found unappealing in Essentials, because you just about described the contents of Heroes of the Fallen Lands above, down to the class and race selection, the increased simplicity and even details like Magic Missile! What is that product missing, for you?

 

[nedjer]

I tend to run very long games, going to high, sometimes very high, levels. So when 5E does come out, because it is coming, it is only a question of when, to draw me to it it will have to answer one problem. Scaling a game form low to high level, within a world, and have it make intuitive sense. Meaning everyone needs to look at what they come up with and be able to say, "Yeah, I can see it working that way."

Why can you be first level, and all the 40th level (What is that called in 4E? Been too long since I've played. Paragon?) haven't already done something to make a first level unneeded?

Also, there are still some major headaches in how the power scales up, even in 4E. Some hard rules need to be decided upon, and more importantly, have them make sense in a world, or worlds, that we all pretend are real.

Essentially they need to come up with some "Laws of Physics" that work for worlds of magic.

They even come close to pulling this off, I'll be back on board with 5E. Or if its still too complicated for me, I'll at least steal the Laws of Physics they come up with. Which will require my buying at least the core to be able to apply it to my gaming.

This seems pretty much the toughest part of the design, as it's real hard to scale a fantasy RPG up past 20th level. The range of options and major outcomes make it next to impossible to cover everything with rules; while handing more back to the GM means making lots of 'out-of-the-air' calls that have major knock-on effects for parties and campaigns.

The distance/ gap between ruling on a Magic Missile and ruling on even a Limited Wish is large to start with and made all the greater when a lot of these calls aren't all going to be well-received/ cough-up for a player/ s.

Quite how they go about balancing at the likes of 40th or 60th level is quite beyond me - but I will bow down before their design if they manage it

 

[Stormonu]

It always seems "too early" for an edition change. I will say at this point that WotC would have to knock my socks off to get me look at the D&D game again; I'm quite happy with all the other fantasy (and otherwise) RPGs that are out now. And I'm certainly not interested in another remake/re-envisioning.

 

[SSquirrel]

I love 4E and don't want a return to 3.x. That would lose me as a customer right off. I'm not a fan of Essentials (altho some of the powers in the essentials books are pretty great) for the super simplified way of running things. I like having options and having so much stuff reduced to "Oh I use a MBA" just feels like the old "I swing my sword at it". I liked that we got away from that with 4E.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Was surprised not to see it in 4E, so I will say it again here. Think they will go system that can be easily converted to on-line play, trying to merge desktp and on-line play. Maybe they just need the time.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I'm curious about what you found unappealing in Essentials, because you just about described the contents of Heroes of the Fallen Lands above, down to the class and race selection, the increased simplicity and even details like Magic Missile! What is that product missing, for you?

Well, I'm not [MENTION=12328]scourger[/MENTION] , and while I'm a fan of Essentials and believe it takes the current game in the right direction, I can maybe point out a selection of things that would prevent someone from embracing Essentials 4e (that is, potential problems with 4e that Essentials doesn't actually solve):

1. Spellcasters don't run out of spells. Wizards don't have a resource management strategy to play with. Magic Missile isn't once per day, it's any time, all day long. That can futz with some people's concept of magic, and some people's idea of what is fun about playing spellcasters.
2. Powers are fairly indistinguishable from one another. Attack vs. Defense for Damage + Effect. Power sources largely lack unique mechanical signifier. All that's separating a warlord from a cleric is fluff.
3. The complexity is still quite deep. Though simplified, the intricate details of positioning, equipment, OAs, action economy, and the like, can still be quite overwhelming, especially for someone used to a simpler and less fiddly system.

That's not comprehensive, but these problems are pretty deeply ingrained into 4e, and while great strides have been made to mitigate them, the core of the matter -- the core of 4e being largely a collection of rules for a minis combat game -- is unlikely to be solved outside of an edition reboot.

This seems pretty much the toughest part of the design, as it's real hard to scale a fantasy RPG up past 20th level.

Personally, I think D&D is functionally a 10-level game. Those ten levels can be different tiers (you're a gardener! you're a hero! you're a god!), but rarely does a group do the whole arc. If you design the game for 10-level play, and just use different "skins" for whichever tiers you want, I think you'd come a long way towards making a system for the way the game is actually used, by and large.