D&D 5E (2024) Revised 6E prediction thread

[darjr]

A lot of character options? Says who?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Anywho, those are my predictions of a 6e. Rather than driven by sales, I think a driving factor will be how the gaming community views design today. I.e., things like race and alignment and the problematic issues therein.

On this, I also disagree.

I think we often tend to overlook both how successful the current iteration of D&D is, and how much D&D is just a "brand" for Hasbro.

We are three years away from the 50th anniversary of D&D. I am sure that they will have all sorts of events planned, and maybe some reprints of classic books, etc. (although with the prevalence of on demand .pdf publishing, maybe not ... perhaps just some deluxe "add-on" art editions).

In terms of a new edition, I truly believe that they intend to keep this as the default "evergreen" edition for as long as sales and cultural cachet permit. I am sure there will be a point, in the future, when a "6e" or a re-vamped 5e (or maybe they will do away with that and it will just be D&D) will be unleashed to goose sales, but we seem to be far from that point.

After all, with movies and TV shows and videogames on the horizon, why bother screwing with the ruleset?

TLDR; Hasbro is a corporation. It's always driven by sales.

 

[Guest 6801328]

And here's my wish-list:

• Make all characters more MAD, to encourage/reward more varied attribute score assignment. That will require a combination of toning down the importance of primary stats (which they have taken steps toward in recent material), creating more subclasses that use alternate stats, and just generally making secondary/tertiary stats more useful.
• Rebalance the spell lists.
• Make Inspiration explicitly after-the-fact, rather than rolling with advantage
• Find new uses for hit dice, including subclasses that can spend them on features
• Add a few new melee combat moves to make Fighters' lives more interesting
• Flesh out some sub-systems for social interaction and exploration

 

[Warpiglet-7]

Does that mean that when we are discussing racial sensitivity in the 6e forums you won't be contributing your usual bon mots?

What I would like is for you to not engage with me on any topic, please.

 

[dave2008]

If we're still doing subclasses, they should start at Level 1. Is that really so hard to let players play the character they chose without spending a session being generic.

I agree with this.

Feats should be non-optional again. Customization should make a comeback.

I somewhat disagree with this. I don't mind requiring feats if we get rid of ASIs. I don't want both.

Also, let's get rid of bounded accuracy. It was a terrible idea in the first place and while some people like flat math and fighting goblins forever, I'm pretty sure more people l think more people like to feel like they're advancing.

Disagree. BA was / is a great idea. It hasn't been implemented as well as it could, but it is one of my favorite things about 5e. If I play 4e again or PF2e I will revise them to make them more bounded.

Eberron as the default campaign setting. Do it, you cowards.

No thanks, too niche or me

 

[Guest 6801328]

I understand it could be split up, but that's now what was said.

Any system where race is nothing but appearance will be an auto hard pass from me.

Any system where race can be nothing but appearance, or where it is nothing but appearance. Because what I'm describing...and what is in the latest UA...is the former. You can still be an elf mechanically.

Also, I don't buy the "nothing but appearance" just because there's no mechanics. If you choose your lineage and say you're an elf, but your DM refuses to treat your character as an elf in the game, then your DM is just an @$$wipe.

 

[dave2008]

4e was a mess. A huge mess. There are over 130 pages of errata in its 7 year history. There was a definite need to get rid of that trainwreck of an edition.

Why did you need to start with an edition war? Also, having lots of errata =/= a "trainwreck of an edition."

If I remember correctly 3e needed a whole new PHB, DMG, & MM to be corrected

 

[Guest 6801328]

What I would like is for you to not engage with me on any topic, please.

There's an app for that.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

Given the material we have, I have barely been able to scratch the surface.

what my group has used has been generally well received.

I suspect that the decoupling or race and ability in anything will continue. I also suspect that they will reduce the class based system and move toward more flexible multiclassing and maybe even some sort of gestalt construct for characters.

5e was good for my group because we liked the older editions and 1e particularly but did not like the strict limitations.

I think 6e will double down on reduction of limitations and even traditional fluff.

 

[dave2008]

The last time they messed with the traditional 9 alignments (4e), it went over like a lead balloon. I really do not see this change happening.

Maybe, personally I loved the "unaligned" option and felt 4e alignment in general was an improvement, but didn't go far enough.