D&D General Are You Ready For A "New" D&D?

[bedir than]

I'm not finished with the stories I'm telling with the current version, so no. I am in favor of minor changes to the rules, but not the system. I could handle additive modules if they are true to 5e and 5.3e (unlike MCDM's Strongholds & Followers which is too complex to see my table).

Small layers, iterations. That's what I want. The journey rules from both LevelUp and Adventurers in Middle Earth are great for example.

 

[Reynard]

Player's Option is a supplement. Which is my point.

Sure. I was being cheeky. But I take your point. A 5E compatible highly granular tactical supplement would be more positively received than a 6E with the same changes.

The desire is there. Usually always there. Just usually not when the base game is created.

 

[Rabbitbait]

I'm not ready to go back to the limited options you get in just a players handbook.

That said, I would be happy with a new edition if they were willing to slaughter the sacred cows of D&D and design a new system the relooks at what the ability scores should be, scraps the 3-18 range of ability scores and just uses bonuses, relooks at how skills work and progress and so much more. But I love the feel of D&D and the ubiquitousness of it.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I think the whole "we've got to kill support for this game so that we can create a new game with the old game's branding and call it a new 'edition'" model of ttrpg creation is terrible. I would like to see every game get refined through several iterative editions (what the word "edition" means in most contexts) until it eventually was "finished" with a core that just remained stable and supported until there were no longer the players to justify publishing anything for it. If people are ready for a new game, make them a new game, and give it it's own damned name.

I am excited for all the 5e clone projects and broadly 5e compatible projects on the near horizon. OneD&D is just the least interesting amongst the offerings of the coming clone age. I would rather they just keep supporting core 5e, rather than make 5e-remixed. But I certainly don't have any desire to see yet another completely different game get the "D&D" brand slapped on it.

 

[Minigiant]

scraps the 3-18 range of ability scores and just uses bonuses,

Or how about this. Design a game system where all the values between 3-18 matter We could design a system where ability scores and ability modifiers both matter. We could design a systemwhere every score could be important to every character and make choosing what score goes where a significant choice.

But like @Reynard argee with me, a tweeked old or current edition will be better received than a new one. So innovation will creep forward. We wont get an aedition when a 15 STR matters to a wizard until 9th edition.

The Dream is that 6e pulls a 4e and kills a bunch of sacred cows to fix common complaints. Then 6e dies and 7e picks out the good ideas form 6e's corpse.

I'n not ready for a New D&D. I'm ready for TWO NEW D&Ds.

 

[tetrasodium]

I think the whole "we've got to kill support for this game so that we can create a new game with the old game's branding and call it a new 'edition'" model of ttrpg creation is terrible. I would like to see every game get refined through several iterative editions (what the word "edition" means in most contexts) until it eventually was "finished" with a core that just remained stable and supported until there were no longer the players to justify publishing anything for it. If people are ready for a new game, make them a new game, and give it it's own damned name.

I am excited for all the 5e clone projects and broadly 5e compatible projects on the near horizon. OneD&D is just the least interesting amongst the offerings of the coming clone age. I would rather they just keep supporting core 5e, rather than make 5e-remixed. But I certainly don't have any desire to see yet another completely different game get the "D&D" brand slapped on it.

I think that to some degree 5e itself created this elastic snapping reaction by maintaining a frozen core that focused so exclusively on anything but GMs when it added visceral additions to the rules. To a degree wotc faced some of the same impossible hurdles GMs ran into when trying to quickly & easily adjust the 5e ruleset as 5e+slight tweak without creating a whole new ruleset. There was little in the way of slight shifts & component adjustments over the last several years so the rough edges gms kept crashing into wound up getting refined into bloody knives that sour the good too much.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I'm good with current 5E, and will be good with any fixes and updates that come with 2024 5E.

If/when they decide to do a major change into a 6E I'd be fine with that too... but don't see a need for it right now. I have no want to return to any former edition, because I played all of them enough to be good with them being put to bed. All of them are fine games just like 5E is a fine game, but I don't really care about game mechanics. All the editions have completely adequate mechanics... so unless a friend of mine steps up to say they want to run a game using an older edition (rather unlikely), there's nothing better about an older edition over 5E. So why go backwards? And most likely a 6E would also have completely adequate mechanics too, so there's nothing for me to gain by a big edition change. One version of D&D is just as good as another. So let's just stay with the one that has product being produced for it.

 

[Umbran]

I don't really buy into what looks like the premise of the question.

I am not a one-game kind of gamer. I haven't generally run the same game system two campaigns in a row in decades. I am not sitting around waiting for D&D to give me experiences that match my desires. When I want 5e, I play 5e. When I want something else, I already play something else.

So, D&D can just go ahead and be whatever they want it to be. I'm happy if they keep it the same, or change it drastically. They can even make it into a game I don't like. I'd be cool with that too - I just wouldn't play it.

 

[Zardnaar]

Kinda over 5E and not interested in clones ATM.

Played Star Wars D6 the other day instead had a lot of fun.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Before last month, I'd say 'god yes, let's try again maybe with a better core philosophy'. But now, I don't really care if they keep up the same old sadness.

 

[Raith5]

Yes, I would like something significantly new. I would need something significantly new in 5.5e to be worth buying it.

I have played 5e a lot and I really enjoyed it. It certainly where I would point new RPG players but I really need something with more complicated character building and tactical combat. I am actually preparing to play Pathfinder 2e so I will see if I regret my choices!

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

I started later in the 5th Ed because I had to await the translations. Then it is relatively soon for a new edition.

And I am more interested into the return of "old classic" like the no-core dragons, and those classes with special game mechanics: vestige pact binders, ki martial adepts, incarnum soulmelders or psionic manifesters.

My suggestion is WotC working in a no fantasy TTRPG, for example a new edition of Gamma World.

 

[wedgeski]

I'm happy with the game as it stands. I want as few structural changes as possible in the next iteration--I want the feeling of an invigorating refresh, but with all the promised continuity to keep my 5E collection relevant (three-qurters of which I have yet to run). I want it all.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

No, 5e is by far my favourite version of D&D.

But I am bored with fantasy, going to experiment with some science fiction RPGs.

 

[ThorinTeague]

I think the whole "we've got to kill support for this game so that we can create a new game with the old game's branding and call it a new 'edition'" model of ttrpg creation is terrible. I would like to see every game get refined through several iterative editions (what the word "edition" means in most contexts) until it eventually was "finished" with a core that just remained stable and supported until there were no longer the players to justify publishing anything for it. If people are ready for a new

Allow me to introduce you to Games Workshop....

Nobody but nobody milks editing game mechanics for cash like GW.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Yes, I am ready for a new version. I would like a D&D that makes more sense and is more coherent.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

5e is the perfect DnD foundation for me. And over the years I've been gradually more disappointed as nothing ever got build onto that foundation. It's basically just been 9 years of subclass/species spam, and that's it.

I just want 5e with more GM tools/support and a few more classes. But it seems that's never going to happen.

 

[delericho]

For OneD&D, I'm happy with them tweaking the existing game, but I'd also be happy with a true 6e. And, honestly, I'd be happy with them not doing it at all. It's all good.

For D&D-like games... actually, I don't want a D&D-like game. I've come to the conclusion that there are some elements of D&D's design that are truly sacred cows but are actually holding the game back (the specific set of 6 ability scores being the obvious example). So any new D&D is stuck with them, but a new not-D&D game would be better off dropping them and doing something else. And that means the new game would indeed be not-D&D, rather than a "new D&D" in any sense.

 

[cranberry]

I think 5E with some tweaks would be good, but at this point, I'm trying to transition to other systems. Primarily PF, but we'll also try FallOut 2d20 and maybe Call of Cthulhu.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I'm not played out on 5e any more than I'm played out on BECMI.
I will look at a new version of D&D when it comes out and make a decision about it when I see it.