Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Next: The Toolbox Edition (What's not to like?)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 5836568" data-attributes="member: 59082"><p>Let's get back to basics for a moment, and look again at the essential design principles of D&D Next. Here's a quote from the D&D 5E Info page:</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>I've highlighted the most crucial part. While this quote is specific to magic use, I think it is quite representative of the design goals for 5E as a whole. </p><p></p><p>So the question is, what's not to like about that? Does anyone actually not approve of the goal of making the game "as modular as possible while still maintaining the baseline of classic D&D fantasy?" Does anyone actually lose if they pull this off? You can play your crunchy 3.5-esque game, even "out-3.5 3.5" with enormously detailed character creation. Or you can play a cinematic wuxia-esque 4E-style game with even more over-the-top powers. Or you can play an old school Gygaxian 1E-esque game.</p><p></p><p>What the game <em>won't </em>do, it seems, is give you a predetermined set of rules that caters to your exact play style and/or railroad everyone into playing the same version of the game. What it <em>will </em>do, as far as I can tell (and hope), is provide a simple basic game and a toolbox of options to play with, to make the game our own.</p><p></p><p>Speaking for myself, they can't be taking a better approach. You mean you're simplifying the core game so I can play quick-and-dirty without complex conditional modifiers and a million rules sub-systems to wade through? I can customize the game so that I only add those sub-systems that I'm interested in, even changing it up in different encounters? You're providing me with a bucket-load of options that are all mutually compatible and I can pick-and-choose from? </p><p></p><p>Again, what's not to like? I know it might be a big "if," but if they <em>do </em>pull this off it really has something for everyone. Even if you still prefer a specific edition of the game to Next, I don't see what fault can be found in this sort of approach unless one feels that everyone should play D&D a certain, uniform way. What D&D Next seems to be (finally) doing is institutionalizing the approach that most DMs and groups take, and helping us do it: making the game customizable and intentionally designing not as a codified system of rules and laws, but a toolbox.</p><p></p><p>If that is really what D&D Next is about, or at least comes close to that, then sign me up! I'm on-board.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mercurius, post: 5836568, member: 59082"] Let's get back to basics for a moment, and look again at the essential design principles of D&D Next. Here's a quote from the D&D 5E Info page: I've highlighted the most crucial part. While this quote is specific to magic use, I think it is quite representative of the design goals for 5E as a whole. So the question is, what's not to like about that? Does anyone actually not approve of the goal of making the game "as modular as possible while still maintaining the baseline of classic D&D fantasy?" Does anyone actually lose if they pull this off? You can play your crunchy 3.5-esque game, even "out-3.5 3.5" with enormously detailed character creation. Or you can play a cinematic wuxia-esque 4E-style game with even more over-the-top powers. Or you can play an old school Gygaxian 1E-esque game. What the game [I]won't [/I]do, it seems, is give you a predetermined set of rules that caters to your exact play style and/or railroad everyone into playing the same version of the game. What it [I]will [/I]do, as far as I can tell (and hope), is provide a simple basic game and a toolbox of options to play with, to make the game our own. Speaking for myself, they can't be taking a better approach. You mean you're simplifying the core game so I can play quick-and-dirty without complex conditional modifiers and a million rules sub-systems to wade through? I can customize the game so that I only add those sub-systems that I'm interested in, even changing it up in different encounters? You're providing me with a bucket-load of options that are all mutually compatible and I can pick-and-choose from? Again, what's not to like? I know it might be a big "if," but if they [I]do [/I]pull this off it really has something for everyone. Even if you still prefer a specific edition of the game to Next, I don't see what fault can be found in this sort of approach unless one feels that everyone should play D&D a certain, uniform way. What D&D Next seems to be (finally) doing is institutionalizing the approach that most DMs and groups take, and helping us do it: making the game customizable and intentionally designing not as a codified system of rules and laws, but a toolbox. If that is really what D&D Next is about, or at least comes close to that, then sign me up! I'm on-board. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Next: The Toolbox Edition (What's not to like?)
Top