5e what would you do?

[WheresMyD20]

If I was designing 5e, it would be a return to the classic roots of D&D. Essentially it would be pretty close to B/X with a few of the mechanics updated like ascending armor class and Fort/Ref/Will saving throws. It would most likely end up looking a lot like Basic Fantasy RPG.

 

[Aurumvorax]

I would continue with the direction 4e is going but offer every TSR back catalog product online as a PDF. I don't understand why Wizards is so far behind times. Video games, music, books, television, and movies have embraced the digital world as a way to market old and out-of-print products that wouldn't survive in the tangible market or would cost way too much to advertise effectively. Why is it that Wizards feels releasing a PDF of their old products would somehow destroy their profits or ADD to piracy instead of reducing it? Pretty much every D&D product ever created has been pirated and circulates the internet. They're losing money by not offering a product. And that's my stance. Someone give me the keys to Wizards/Hasbros office.

 

[messy]

start with the d20 system, simplify it, make all feats/spells/powers/etc usable at will, add a dash of gygaxian flair, then serve hot.

 

[delericho]

I agree with others that say it's way too soon for 5e.

However, when the time comes, IMO the single most important thing they need to do is lower the barrier to entry for new players to get into the game.

So, the "3 book" model should go - there should be a Core Rulebook of no more than 250 pages. Anything that doesn't fit (probably most of the races, most of the classes, and the upper levels of play) will need to be relegated to supplements.

The Starter Set should be released at the same time as the Core Rulebook, should include enough material for some months of play, should include character creation rules, and absolutely must use the same rules as the 'real' game - not a dumbed down set. (Ideally, the Starter Set would include that same Core Rulebook as everyone else uses.)

Also released at the same time as the Core Rulebook and the Starter Set should be a "Dungeon Delves" type product, containing a number of low-level adventures suitable for zero-prep play. It should even include pregenerated characters. (This may be made redundant by a sufficiently expansive Starter Set.)

As far as demo games, D&D Gamedays, and Organised Play is concerned, I feel that WotC are actually doing a really good (actually, spectacular) job.

The one thing I might be tempted to try (in addition) is a distributed equivalent of the "Dungeon Delve" event from GenCon - distribute a killer dungeon to game stores, and try to run it as a competitive event (DMs... how many PCs can you kill in an hour? Players... how far can you get?).

But while the idea is simple enough, I have no idea how to handle the practicalities. It would have to work on an honour system, and that would probably mean that the 'prize' would have to be nothing more than bragging rights.

As far as the actual mechanics are concerned... well, I'd probably go with something that looked more like 3e than 4e, but that looked a lot more like SWSE than either. But, actually, I think the mechanics of the next edition are less important than their presentation.

 

[Mercurius]

Too soon, yes, but you know that the good people at WotC must all have folders entitled "Ideas for 5E."

IMO the biggest flaw with 4E--and I would call it a flaw and not simply a "design feature"--is that the style of game play is too specific and not flexible enough. 5E should allow for a variety of styles, maybe with a similar tier structure as 4E but with an "Apprentice Tier" before Heroic and maybe an "Immortal Tier" after Epic.

In addition to including a pre-Heroic Tier--which could actually be optional--the system itself would be even further simplified so that one could play a very clean version of D&D with very little added trappings. 5E would be modular with a basic core game and many different options, with three major levels of play:

*Basic - simple core game. Common to all variants.
*Advanced - complex core game. The default mode for tournament play.
*Options - numerous possible variants, house rules, etc. These would be specific to each campaign.

Furthermore, in addition to campaign settings, WotC would focus on "Theme Books" that are genre/setting/style hybrids. One theme book could be "Post-Apocalyptic Fantasy" and use Dark Sun as its example setting. Another could be "Sword & Sorcery" or "Dark Fantasy" or "Science Fantasy," etc. They are genres but they would use a core setting as a basis to explicate the theme.

As far as game mechanics go, I like the idea that Cactot mentioned about having different mechanics for each power source, but I wouldn't want them to differ too much, and thus they should all use the basic d20 mechanic. What could differ is the way powers are arranged; 4E is already moving in this direction, first from the PHB powers, then PHB 3 Psionics, and now the martial characters in Essentials.

Lots of other ideas but I am short on time, but I will throw one more in: Bring back classic alignments! They are kind of silly but I miss them.

 

[Jack Daniel]

Consider this another vote for the notion of a tiered complexity system. The best thing that WotC could do, by far, for 5th edition is to have a relatively simple and free form "basic" game which can then be upgraded to an "advanced" game for hardcore players who want that added complexity. But, unlike how TSR kept both D&D and AD&D on the market as separate and mostly incompatible games, make the advanced game a mere extension of the basic game. In fact, I would love to see:

1) A "Basic" game that comes in a box, and isn't crippleware. It should have everything you need to run a classic campaign (fighters/wizards/clerics/rogues, elves/dwarves/halflings/humans) to at least 5th level.

2) An "Expert" game, possibly done up like the Essentials digest-sized paperbacks, which both takes the basic game to high levels (15th or 20th) and includes the traditional "sub" classes and races (gnomes, half-elves, half-orcs, and eladrin and drow I guess; and paladins, rangers, barbarians, druids, illusionists, assassins, bards, monks, warlords, and of course some new mage-that-isnt'-a-mage to carry on in the tradition of 3e sorcerers and 4e warlocks).

3) The "Advanced" game, published as a set of traditional hardback books (although I certainly wouldn't lament the demise of the PHB/DMG/MMX model), for added complexity like tactical battles, more class and race and other character options, settings and adventure paths. Various options to create your own "complete" game with "a rule for everything" instead of ad hoc DM rulings.

==========

Beyond that, I think that it is incumbent on WotC to address the more obvious problems with 4e, the things that drive gamers away from it. It took years for the major 3e problems to emerge and be seen in the light of day; it was more like months for 4e. So... I guess it goes without saying, but a rigorous play-testing regimen is step zero. You can't just "do the math" and take your armchair analysis as proof that you've cooked up the best-ever version of D&D. Mainly, 5e must at least fix the following:

1) The grind. If combat is eating up the bulk of game session, you haven't designed and RPG, you've designed a wargame with RPG trappings.

2) Combat equivalency. Because, again, combat is not the last word in tabletop fun, characters who aren't good at fighting should be viable options. If the game doesn't have something as basic and important and needed as a Craft skill, then once again, we've got a problem.

3) The implied setting. This is more of a pet peeve than anything that will really put me off the inevitable 5th edition, but D&D is the flagship RPG. It should therefore be the most generic fantasy RPG that it can be. 4e took a great many rules sacred cows and shot them in the head. Let's hope that 5e takes "Points of Light World" and shoots it in the head.

 

[ggroy]

Another point which can be raised, is whether there is ever going to be an "official" 5E D&D.

In principle, they can keep on releasing subsequent D&D books in the spirit of "4E Essentials" type stuff, instead of producing actual legitimate new editions.

In a few years, we may see Mearls (or his successor) producing a "4E Essential Essentials".

 

[Afrodyte]

It needs to do only two things to really get my attention:

- return to having a sense of mystery
- make character build far far far less relevant than character personality

After that, it's pretty much all fine-tuning.

Exactly. I'd be great if the core D&D books took a hint from True20, but that's a bit far-fetched right now.

 

[Mercurius]

Another point which can be raised, is whether there is ever going to be an "official" 5E D&D.

In principle, they can keep on releasing subsequent D&D books in the spirit of "4E Essentials" type stuff, instead of producing actual legitimate new editions.

In a few years, we may see Mearls (or his successor) producing a "4E Essential Essentials".

It could be that WotC will pretend that there will not be a 5E, that with DDI, Essentials, and other such products, they can continue indefinitely with only minor adjustments. However, eventually the product treadmill will run dry and eventually the minor adjustments will accumulate to such a degree that "revised" version of the core books will not suffice (we'll probably see that in 2012, would be my guess).

The bottom line is that eventually it will come to a point that the best way for WotC to create a significant windfall is to publish a new edition. In some ways, if you are looking at it from a business perspective, the best time to release a new edition is as soon as lots of people will buy it. The time is obviously not yet, and WotC can probably generate enough steady revenue with DDI and the product treadmill for a few more years, but in another couple years they're going to start serious plans for a new edition, which would probably be released sometime between 2014 and 2016. 2014 seems rather soon - only six years after the release of 4E - but it is hard to imagine four more years of 4E without WotC coming up with something seriously new.

Now if WotC markets it right, they could come out with 5E sooner than they normally would feel good about, especially if they market it as a kind of unitive edition that integrates the best of all previous editions and will appeal to Old and New School alike. It will have to be shiny but authentic, innovative but classic. And, as I said, it will need to be able to accommodate everyone's version of D&D.

A tall order, I know. But I think it is possible! Which is why I advocate a simple basic game with modular advanced options. Imagine a game in which you could play a True20 style rules-lite game and a tactics-heavy wargame, just by adopting easily ported rules packages. A future version of D&D Insider would well support this; it could easily convert from one option to another, sort of like those old atlases with the clear plastic sheets you could lay over a base map to see climate or population or currents, etc.

On the other hand they would have to make it so that all modular variants still felt like the same game. Part of the appeal of D&D versus other games is the large community, the feeling that hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of others are playing D&D. Sure, you get community with Savage Worlds but how many are playing it at any one time? Maybe a couple thousand? Less?

D&D is, and will always be, the RPG. But what can, will and does vary is how much of the extended fanbase is focused on purchasing new material. My guess is that a historically small percentage of D&D players are buying new product that WotC is producing. Pathfinder will never come close to threatening 4E for pre-eminency but it is denting its profitability, not only by providing a quality alternative but because it gives all of the 3.x hold-outs another reason not to move to 4E. So whatever 5E eventually looks like, it must appeal to three groups: those "lost" to older editions, fans of the current edition, and potential new players. Good luck, WotC .

 

[delericho]

In some ways, if you are looking at it from a business perspective, the best time to release a new edition is as soon as lots of people will buy it.

That used to be the case, but consider that they now have the DDI to consider. If this is to continue, but they want to significantly revise the rules, then they'll need to go to significant expense to redesign the DDI. That's not going to be a cheap or easy job. So, there may be much more inertia working against 5e than there was against previous editions.

And, as I said, it will need to be able to accommodate everyone's version of D&D.

A tall order, I know. But I think it is possible!

So whatever 5E eventually looks like, it must appeal to three groups: those "lost" to older editions, fans of the current edition, and potential new players. Good luck, WotC .

Honestly, I don't think this is possible. The battle-lines are now just too entrenched. And I suspect a large portion of those who are 'lost' to Pathfinder are now gone forever. (The same is probably true of the retroclones also, but I suspect the numbers are so much smaller as can be considered "not a problem".)

I suspect that, to see a reunification, gaming would first need to undergo a seismic shift, of the scale of the collapse of TSR. Either WotC would need to collapse, and D&D be sold to Paizo, or both WotC and Paizo would need to collapse, and both be bought out by a third party. (It's just about possible that WotC could buy out Paizo, but they'd have to handle it very carefully, or they'd just alienate Pathfinder fans even more.)

No, assuming that 5e is still produced by WotC, I would argue that they would be better served focussing heavily on bringing in new gamers, making a better game for their existing fans... and largely ignoring the 'lost' fans, except where they can recapture them on an opportunistic basis.