Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mallus" data-source="post: 5885515" data-attributes="member: 3887">The biggest problem with "being D&D" is that there isn't one D&D. Setting aside different editions, there are a host of divergent play styles --which is to say effectively different games-- to be found among groups using the same edition. That said, there are some solid reasons for the designers to be looking backwards.First, there is a large body of excellent and, more importantly, basically interoperable supplemental material made for pre-3e editions, not to mention great new material coming out of the OSR. Leveraging it would be a smart idea. I'm not suggesting 5e be a retroclone (well, not exactly...), but the more WotC can do to keep that mountain of old IP (plus the OSR material) useful to 5e players, the better.Second, if nothing else, they should be shooting for a lower level of complexity than 3e/4e/Pathfinder. Especially Pathfinder. Complex D&D with lots of options/bells/whistles is Paizo's game now, and competing for their market segment doesn't sound like a smart idea to me. If they are creating a simpler (baseline) game, then the choice between designing a system that's similar to a prior version of D&D vs. one that's significantly divergent is a no-brainer. I like new (ie, I enjoy both 3e and 4e). But now seems like a great time for what's old (in a modified form) to be new again.</blockquote>