D&D 5E D&D 5.5e; Your wish for 5.5e update.

[cbwjm]

About the only thing I can think of that I would want them to change, is to make all classes gain their subclasses at the same level. I'm not sure on the progression, but I'd like to see them all gain a subclass at level one and then gain an extra 3 or 4 subclass abilities.

The main reason I would like this is to help facilitate cross class subclasses, that is subclasses that aren't linked to a single class in anyway and work with either of them. Classes would still have subclasses unique to them, however, if a table wanted to move a wizard subclass to a sorcerer, for instance, this would allow easy adaptation.

 

[Cyvris]

Make the Battlemaster class either baseline for or have a straight equivalent of it for ALL non-casters. 5e would be a great edition if the non-casters weren't melee basic attack spammers again. Something to spice up the monotony would be nice. I houserule it easily enough (fighting styles are now "stances" and each class gets several of them to swap between), but some sort of official set up for it would be very appreciated.

Still miffed WotC seems to have pulled back on their "you 'll be able to add features you liked from other editions with modules we'll release" marketing pitch.

 

[Argyle King]

I think I'd need more than a half-edition to accomplish the changes I would want to make.

 

[Illithidbix]

So about 2 and a half years after the release of the 5E PHB and Basic rules, I count... 15ish 5E releases so far.
Of which, only 3 (Sword Coast Adventure's Guide, Volo's Guide to Monsters and the free Princes of the Apocalypse: Players Companion) add very much in the way of extra crunch.
Six have been adventures.

My list of 3E releases shows there were something in the region of... 47 releases for 3rd edition by this stage in it's development cycle. So I'm not expecting a new edition anytime soon.

Otherwise my main suggestion is to get rid of the following rule "If you want to interact with a second object, you need to use your action."


... and bring back the awesome manoeuvre and Expertise/Martial Damage Dice mechanics that were in the playtest around October-December 2012.

 

[dave2008]

Would be a better presentation and delivery of the information, in my wishful opinion.



How about you? No wish?

Interesting. With that concept I might take it further and have races be a separate supplement and maybe classes could be a separate supplement too.

Personally, the things I want will never be in D&D, so I don't wish for them I just make them myself

 

[ccs]

Well, some version of update will happen.

Will it be 5.5e or 6th, I don't know. But the money treadmill must go on.

And they tend to release new edition or revision of current edition around 4 years apart. For 5th edition that comes in 2018.

6e, about 2022/2023.

 

[ccs]

If only it were a choice. ;(


I know it's a typo, but they actually /were/ talking that in 2008. (Might've been 8-10 or something). Anyway, it went 2, followed by 2 years of Essentials. So 'past performance' /and/ 'talk is cheap.' Plenty of grains of salt to go around.



0D&D 1974

The MM was '77, PH '78, the DMG, '79.
3.5 2002 - 2y
4e 2008 6y
Essentials 2010 2y
Next 2012 2y
5e 2014 2y
it's 2017.

Looks like they bottomed out? ;P

I call BS on Next as an edition. It was just the Playtest material for 5th.
The only reason we all got to see it was as a PR stunt
A) because they had squat to sell any of us as most of their (D&D) bussiness had walked away around 2010,
B) because Paizo releases their stuff for public playtesting & garners alot of good will in the process. Monkey see, monkey do....
Had WoTC been making D&D $? "Next" would've happened behind closed doors & NDAs.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I call BS on Next as an edition.

Just on that? Have you not been keeping up with the thread?

Still miffed WotC seems to have pulled back on their "you 'll be able to add features you liked from other editions with modules we'll release" marketing pitch.

They haven't delivered on it, yet...

 

[Jester David]

A) because they had squat to sell any of us as most of their (D&D) bussiness had walked away around 2010,

They sold stuff all through 2011 and 2012, first when they were working on 5e in house and then during the playtest. They could have continued to do 4e product with freelancers, or had system agnostic material.

B) because Paizo releases their stuff for public playtesting & garners alot of good will in the process. Monkey see, monkey do....
Had WoTC been making D&D $? "Next" would've happened behind closed doors & NDAs.

I think it's more than that.
The staff at WotC knew what they liked. But that was a half-dozen voices. And they knew what the squeaky voices on the message boards thought. But that was a few hundred people. They needed to find out what the hundred thousand other gamers wanted from the game and thought about D&D.
It was as much about reconnecting with the larger D&D community.

Plus, after 4e, they needed to win back some lapsed fans. And an easy way to do that is to listen to them and let them try the game for free. In that regard it kinda was a PR move, but calling it a "stunt" feels a little cheap.

 

[Jester David]

Still miffed WotC seems to have pulled back on their "you 'll be able to add features you liked from other editions with modules we'll release" marketing pitch.

I think people just read waaaay too much into what was a loose design goal super early in the process.
It was much less hyped as a goal than the VTT of 4e. 3e probably had similarly hyped goals that didn't come through, I just don't recall any.

And, really, you can add features from last editions pretty easily. The system is robust enough to handle that level of hacking. It's just not in the books.