D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[Scribe]

No, I am expecting that they tell DMs that they can do that.

And with examples.

Campaign Frames are great.

 

[Aldarc]

You're not advocating for a different version of official D&D? My apologies.

I was quite clear when I said that it's perfectly natural and acceptable for game companies/designers to look at what other games on the market are doing and consider adapting things from those games for their game. Make no mistake. WotC looked at PF1 when designing 5e D&D.

 

[dave2008]

Yeah it opens up more space for alternative designs for people who want them. I'd rather have a D&D with a bold and clear and consistent design, whether it's incredibly popular or just pretty popular (because it's unlikely to be less than that!) because then people who want something different can more easily find it, and people who like what D&D offers probably like it more.

I understand that idea, but homebrew is ingrained into my conception of D&D. I am much more likely to homebrew D&D than I am to try a dozen different D&D like games. So whatever the next edition looks like, I would want it to be easy to modify / homebrew. To me that is the heart of D&D. I am not suggesting you make it a requirement like the OD&D or early AD&D days, but it should be a significant feature if it is to be D&D to me!

 

[Micah Sweet]

By course a new sea, I think he would want WotC to abandon 50 years of IP that he cares about and create all new stuff he can ignore. Start from scratch.

That would be ideal, but I'd be happy with an incompatible game that doesn't intimidate 3pp as badly into following their path.

 

[Scribe]

That would be ideal, but I'd be happy with an incompatible game that doesn't intimidate 3pp as badly into following their path.

Incompatible does a lot of lifting.

Is 1e not compatible with 3e, with SD, with ToV?

The degree of separation is not so vast.

 

[mamba]

Because they didn't go far enough. They IMO lacked the courage of their convictions. At least, the money people did.

the premise always was to release something compatible.

I would have liked them to have gone farther with that, but I have no evidence that they did not release the version they felt was the right one with that premise in mind.

I don’t think they have a specific version in mind and then chicken out if there is enough backlash, I think they are generally open minded and are happy to go into whatever direction they think is the popular one

 

[dave2008]

...that doesn't intimidate 3pp as badly into following their path.

That is thing though. D&D would have to be significantly less popular, or less accommodating (looking at you 4e), for it to not persuade 3PP to follow it wherever it goes.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Incompatible does a lot of lifting.

Is 1e not compatible with 3e, with SD, with ToV?

The degree of separation is not so vast.

To my mind, 2e, 3e, 4e, and 5e are largely incompatible with each other, beyond themes and the like. That's the degree of separation I'm imagining.

 

[mamba]

I dunno maybe you should have quoted that bit instead of an entirely other bit?

didn’t want to quote the whole text. I don’t like quoting a hundred lines for a two line reply. I was referencing parts outside my quote in my reply, so I expected it to be clear that I am responding to the entire post, not just the quoted part.

 

[Micah Sweet]

the premise always was to release something compatible.

I would have liked them to have gone farther with that, but I have no evidence that they did not release the version they felt was the right one with that premise in mind.

I don’t think they have a specific version in mind and then chicken out if there is enough backlash, I think they are generally open minded and are happy to go into whatever direction they think is the popular one

I don't agree that backwards compatibility was a good premise, then or now.