D&D 5E D&D New Edition Design Looks Soon?

WotC’s Ray Winninger has hinted on Twitter that we may be seeing something of the 2024 next edition of D&D soon — “you’ll get a first look at some of the new design work soon.”.

 

[Reynard]

First, from my perspective 5E's goals and 2024's goals are very different. I think 5E embraced former players and the OSR (which has always been a very profitable part of the hobby) and emphasized rulings over rules and channeling the nostalgia of earlier editions as well as a Rosetta Stone for all editions. I think 2024 has to have different goals because there are literally millions of new players and they should be the priority.

As for what I liked about 4E that I think might serve those new players better Alignment was far looser and Creatures didn't have a fixed alignment. I personally like Per Encounter better than Short Rest but you can tweak it easily. I also think using movement in squares instead of feet would be helpful for new players.

Again, to me, 5E was about getting lapsed players back where 2024 is about growing more new players and giving the millions of new ones a streamlined experience.

You suggested that 4E had things that new players were asking for, but then talked about your preferences. What I am curious about is why you think newer players want specific things that were present in 4E and not in 5E, and what those things were. As someone not especially familiar with 4E (I played maybe a dozen sessions all told, and never past Tier 1) I am curious what about it aligns with newer player preferences, which as far as I can tell by following RPG discussions on reddit and youtube is heavily story oriented with an even bigger focus on Rule of Cool and fun aesthetics than 5E already has.

 

[Reynard]

To me the biggest wildcard is on monster design. Since that is primarily experienced by DMs I think you have a bit more latitude there, as DMs are more rules focused and I think more open to changes than your wider and more casual player base. If there are going to be "big changes" I would expect to see them in monsters.

I wouldn't say that monster design is "primarily experienced" by DMs. The opposite, actually. Players experience the monster design through actual play. DMs SEE that design in a different way, certainly, but the experience belongs mostly to the players.

 

[Mind of tempest]

we have aberrant mind sorcerer with spell points variant, subtle spell metamagic and Telekinetic feat for that

counterpoint the mystic let me play a budget meat mage, and some other stuff thus I am still lacking what I want even if I was not burdened by the necrotic chassis that is the sorcerer.

 

[Kurotowa]

Which leaves the question of whether the tastes of gamers actually changed that much over the years with some demographics growing larger than others, or if it's creator's bias towards it that is weighting it that way.

I'd put it down to partly the changing demographic from the pre-5e days, partly them rediscovering the hard truth that most people don't know what they actually want.

Yes, out of context that sounds patronizing and elitist, but it's true. The example that explained it to me was that if you survey people about how they like their steak a lot of them will say they like it rare, but if you put them to a taste test the majority lands in the medium to medium-rare band. And this is because there's social cachet to liking your steak rare, be it that you're a true foodie or a manly man, and so a lot of people will default to that as their answer. Especially if they almost never eat steak and don't know what the various rarities actually correspond to.

That's why there's been so much refinement in how the player surveys are structed. What they ask, how they ask it, even asking variations on the same question multiple times. It's to try and filter out the bad data of people answering what they think they ought to say and get to the truth of their preferences. Also now that 5e has been around for nearly 10 years they've got a lot more play data to work on, and that's what the equivalent to the taste test is.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I feel it's a VERY NARROW tightrope to walk and balance. Do it right and the audience will give you a standing ovation. Do it wrong and you fall from the wire to your death. It's a risky gamble.

I'd almost say it would be easier to make an entirely new edition than to release AE as a continuation of 5e, but that's me. That method is not the current business plan for D&D presently...hopefully the AE is an astounding success.

my personal opinion (based on previus WotC projects) is that I have little faith in them pulling it off. They will want to be as conservative as possible so they can claim backwards compatibility, but that will limit fixing systematic issues. They will want to change enough to make it different enough to warrant buying new books and this will make it not really useable with the 2014 PHB, and the early splat books will all need updating.

I WANT 6e... but I FEAR they will stand in the middle of the road and get hit by cars going both ways

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I think the Neo-Vancian casting of 5E does a very good job mirroring general genre assumptions about how Magic works. Notably, one of the major design precursors for the 5E approach was WotC own d20 Wheel of Time RPG.

the thing is it seems like it now today is cutting edge of spell casting systems for 22 years ago... it is the most dogmatic not updated part of the game.

having the warlock able to mage armor, speak with animals and detect magic at will while other casters (sorcerers are magic born but can't detect that well, druids are the nature people and can't speak with animals that well) shows the hang up of the vancian ssytem...

somewhere WotC KNOWS and has shown that some of these higher level spells (even speak with dead) can be at will and not mess with balance.

 

[Stalker0]

I wouldn't say that monster design is "primarily experienced" by DMs. The opposite, actually. Players experience the monster design through actual play. DMs SEE that design in a different way, certainly, but the experience belongs mostly to the players.

The difference is....the players aren't really seeing the mechanics. They don't see behind the curtain, they just have X monster that does Y thing, and they have to react to it. Also, players are used to the idea that monsters get all sort of weird crazy abilities (that the DM explains to them as they fight the monster), so adjusting monsters with new crazy abilities players have not seen isn't seen as "weird" as compared to changing how the fighter swings their sword.

 

[Stalker0]

somewhere WotC KNOWS and has shown that some of these higher level spells (even speak with dead) can be at will and not mess with balance.

Just noting that speak with dead at will would be insanely powerful, it could lead to crazy amounts of leaked info. Now 5e's speak with dead can never be truly at will, as it has a once per 10 day per corpse limit, which is a very important restriction.

 

[Blue]

I know I'm in the minority but part of me wants them to rereleases 4e & Essentials as "5.5" LOL
So many things newer players want were in that edition.

Well, they have said "compatible", so it would be 4e updated to 5e. Bounded accuracy, stacking spell slots, up-cast spells. Hour long short rests.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Just noting that speak with dead at will would be insanely powerful, it could lead to crazy amounts of leaked info. Now 5e's speak with dead can never be truly at will, as it has a once per 10 day per corpse limit, which is a very important restriction.

warlocks can take

Whispers of the Grave​

Prerequisite: 9th level
You can cast Speak with Dead at will, without expending a spell slot.

there is one like it for alter self, disguise self, mage armor, speak with animals, silent image, and Invisability.

a 15th level warlock can have all of those leveled spells as cantrips at will