Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 5474720" data-attributes="member: 59082">Cool beans. Your formulation is actually rather similar to mine, although I've included more "meat" in the books part - I think there will still be room for theme and setting books, which just don't translate well online.True, true. I'm wondering, though, just how much 5E would splinter 4E. Maybe I'm wrong but I could see 4E becoming a bit of a "lost edition" like 2E; people either tried and moved back to earlier editions or they are willing to move on to the Next Thing. How many people play 2E today? My guess is less than any other major edition. If you want "old school" AD&D play you go for 1E and maybe supplement with 2E materials. If you want "new school" game design you go for 3.x or 4E. If you want a simple version of D&D you go for OD&D or BECMI. I have a feeling 4E will be similar. The 3.x folks will stay with 3.x or Pathfinder, while the bulk of 4E players will go with the New & Shiny that 5E offers. So if WotC can get 80-90% of current 4E players, a bunch lapsed players and new players, and maybe scrape away a few from Pathfinder and 3.x, then 5E becomes a possibility.Maybe. My guess is that there are diehard Pathfinder folks that won't switch to 5E just about no matter what, and then there are a bunch of moderates who might give 5E a chance if it looked good no matter when it came out. So I don't think they need to tie 5E with Pathfinder at all - it will float or sink on its own merits, not on whether people are sick of Pathfinder. On the other hand, your post gave me an idea: What if WotC and Paizo time it right so that the 2E of Pathfinder and the 5E of D&D are...the same thing. This is the scenario where Hasbro is sick of D&D and sells it off to...Paizo, who brings the two games back together. Of course this probably will never happen, if only because if Paizo ever has the money to buy D&D from Hasbro then they probably don't need the D&D brand name. But it is an interesting thought...Hmm...I'm not a huge fan of DDI, but I don't think it is competing with WoW at all. I completely agree that WotC should focus on what makes D&D unique, but tools like Character Builder and Monster Builder actually can accent traditional tabletop play in the same way that, say, a laptop makes a writer's life so much easier than a typewriter does. But the key is accent and not replace. The VTT and similar concepts are one step too far away from "what makes D&D unique." It is similar to the problem with the battlemap and minis but tenfold: It removes the focus of attention away from the shared imagination space onto something perceivable and simulative. And it is the shared imagination space that makes RPGs unique and differentiates them from, say, video games or board games.DDI tools that enhance/accent the shared imagination space = goodDDI tools that replace/simulate the shared imagination space = bad</blockquote>

Verification