D&D 5E D&DNext - Frankenstein or Butterfly?

[GX.Sigma]

I think the problem is writing DDN now is a bad idea. It is the wrong climate. Too many people are too heavily invested in too many different visions of what D&D is.

On the contrary: that's why writing DDN now is the only good idea.

WotC would be better off publishing 4e adventures for 3-4 years until the dust clears

Only if you think it'd be better off dead. The dust is D&D's impending doom (and 4e is what's causing the dust storm).

Mod Note: Please see my post below. ~Umbran

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

And were you there in the early alpha tests of 4E to state categorically that the "core" of 4E's miniature grid-based design was in fact there from the beginning? If you were, and thus can speak specifically to the alpha documents that were pretty much what we got in the final versions... then great, your point is made.

But if all you are doing is guessing that the only way 4E could have been made is if those alpha documents had the base design from the get-go (beause you just can't fathom how it could be otherwise)... then you're basically blowing smoke.

Personally... I think that if you truly think that 4E's core was pretty much there and set from the get-go, and it was only the pretty bells and whistles that were "playtested" over it's several year development... you're fooling yourself and have no idea how game development actually occurs.

I didn't say anything about 4e, but if you're asking, then why yes you first build a core system. You HAVE to, especially for a highly integrated system like 4e where everything builds directly off the core in a tight fashion. If you're core is unstable and changing then it is a waste of time to bother with anything else.

In any case, as we both know, 4e went through a couple of iterations of core rules, and then things were nailed down and fleshed out. Now, look at DDN, did Mearls not just tweet like YESTERDAY about having "2 more small things" to nail down and then "the core is set"? He did! So it is nice that you are theorizing and all, but you don't do all your class, monster, item, spell, etc design until the core is done. That's where they are at now. No doubt there are SMALL thing that can be tweaked still, even a few mid-sized changes to details of a sub-system, but to think that somehow the existing DDN is going to magically transform into an integrated 4e-type system is just failing to engage with the reality of the situation as described by the designers themselves, let alone me.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

On the contrary: that's why writing DDN now is the only good idea.Only if you think it'd be better off dead. The dust is D&D's impending doom (and 4e is what's causing the dust storm).

We can argue that one all day long, so why bother?

I think they screwed up royally by neglecting to put out decent adventures. They seem to have at least got a clue HOW to do that, perhaps, in the last year or so. I'm relatively sure they can make plenty of salable ones.

 

[RACER_X?HAHAHA]

We can argue that one all day long, so why bother?

I think they screwed up royally by neglecting to put out decent adventures. They seem to have at least got a clue HOW to do that, perhaps, in the last year or so. I'm relatively sure they can make plenty of salable ones.

Only if they gave up on 5e. They don't have the capital to do both. I do agree that they were lacking in adventures, but now isn't the time to do that.

 

[Umbran]

The dust is D&D's impending doom (and 4e is what's causing the dust storm).

Let us be clear about something - the only "storm" out there is among people. The rules cannot *MAKE* you do anything - if folks are raising dust like edition warriors, it is their own fault. They cannot blame the game for acting like jerks.

We should stop blaming the rules for things people do.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Let us be clear about something - the only "storm" out there is among people. The rules cannot *MAKE* you do anything - if folks are raising dust like edition warriors, it is their own fault. They cannot blame the game for acting like jerks.

We should stop blaming the rules for things people do.

Quite right. I apologize if I was fanning the flames (unintentionally, I assure you). I have nothing against anyone's rules. It seems my extension of the analogy was not as deft as I'd imagined.

All I meant to say, in response to AbdulAlhazred's post, is: if it were financially viable to continue to print 4e product, WotC would still be printing 4e product.

WotC D&D is in a tough spot, and publishing a new edition is really their best (possibly only) option at this point. I don't have the financial data, but it seems clear that they've been losing a great deal of money recently, and it seems equally clear that the best solution is to stop doing the thing that's losing them the money, and try to do something to get the money back. From a business standpoint, developing D&D Next is the only thing that makes sense.

As always, play what you like (We'll always have our old books.)

 

[Argyle King]

C) People seem to have no idea what actually happens during a playtest and are panicking... making absurd declarations about material 95% of which will not even appear in the final document two years from now.

In some cases, that is certainly true.

However, it is also possible to look at the steps of something and have a good idea about what the ideals behind the designer's desired end results are. A mil is a very small unit of measure. Still, when I look across a field toward a target, I can still gain an idea of how far off my shot will be at the end if I'm off by only a few mils when I pull the trigger. It may be that I need to adjust my spotting scope, but --at the current point in time-- I feel that I am either not the target audience for what WoTC is shooting for or their aim is a little off. Which is strange because there were a few original ideas (back at the beginning of the playtest) which had made me feel very good about the product. Unfortunately, I'm having some D&D Deja Vu because --much like my experience with 4E-- I feel as though there are a lot of great ideas which I liked at the beginning which do not seem to be getting carried forward into what will be the end product.

 

[Steely_Dan]

Well we know that Star Wars Saga Edition and Tome of Battle were snapshots of 4th Ed design at certain points in time, I personally wish they had gone more with the SWSE approach, and less with the ToB route.

 

[Steely_Dan]

Unfortunately, I'm having some D&D Deja Vu because --much like my experience with 4E-- I feel as though there are a lot of great ideas which I liked at the beginning which do not seem to be getting carried forward into what will be the end product.

Me too, was very jazzed with the 1st packet, but with that last one, I suddenly smelled something, and I'm not sure I like it.

Maybe it's the classes I'm so keen on in the latest.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Only if they gave up on 5e. They don't have the capital to do both. I do agree that they were lacking in adventures, but now isn't the time to do that.

Oh, well, clearly someone should have thought a lot more carefully about what they were doing a year or so ago. Honestly I think they should have gone outside for a management change and an objective view of the situation. Probably clean outside of the whole industry. I don't think the people at WotC lack cleverness but they're clearly not in a position to make good decisions from where I sit. It may hurt to fix things, but once the pain is over the healing can start.