Do you want/are you ready for a D&D 5th edition?

[Mercutio01]

I stumbled across some older posts of mine circa 2009 that discussed the fact that changes WotC made to the website effectively removed me as a customer, and I was accused of being hyperbolic (not in so many words, but that was the general intimation). It's interesting to me to look back now and see that it did exactly that. I was a fan of 4E, bought the core books immediately after release, and hyped the hell out of them, but the WotC model shifted away from me, which left me effectively out of the loop.

So, yes, I'm ready for a 5E, but I'm more wary this time. I read through the Essentials stuff at a Barnes and Noble, closely examined the box sets, and decided that they weren't for me. I'm a fan of many of the changes that were made to create 4E, but moreso as a DM than a player. My ideal 5E would merge some elements of 4E and 3.5E, or else scrap both completely, look back what worked in all previous editions, and used that to construct a new system that captures all of those previous lessons learned.

But all that is wishful thinking, to be honest. At this point, I'm looking smaller and more narrowly focused. My interests have shifted to indie-game design. I would probably buy 5E and look closely at it. I'm open to swinging back to the D&D brand, but as it stands now, it's unlikely.

 

[Pilgrim]

I voted yes, just because I'm mildly curious to see what the WotC thinks the next step in the game's design should be.

But quite honestly, over the last few months I've realized I'm kinda sick and tired of the WotC/D&D roller coaster. Tired of the constant edition changes, tired of what feels like a constant state of system testing (lets try something new and innovative.....ok cool, for a while.....now we're tired of it....lets take things back, but not all the way....ok yeah now lets take it back further....) in an effort to find the Holy Grail of D&D.

I'm also pretty bored of the "hush-hush" game that WotC plays with their R&D. If they're working on something new, just come out and say it, so those interested can get hyped up and those not, at least have some idea of what to expect for what they are currently playing. Playing "lets wait and make a big announcement at GenCon" or other such nonsense gets old fast.

So, while I'm curious to see what they have planned for the next iteration, I'm skeptical that I'll do anything more than play it if anyone in my area wants to run it. I just don't know at this point if I'd invest in yet "another" edition.

There are too many other "stable" games that I find just as interesting and would rather spend money on, knowing that at least the likely-hood of it not changing within 2-3 years is pretty high.

So whether they toss our something new, or whether they keep with what's current, doesn't make a whole lot of difference to me, in the end.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Really, where, in me asking for one example of a positive thing he's said, does it imply he's bashing it. Seriously, how is it implied?

Or do you not understand the difference between someone with nothing positive to say and someone bashing something? Because, there is a difference.

Let me turn it around then - why should he say anything nice about it? It is not his game.

And yes, there was an implication in your tone that he has had negative things to say about 4e, otherwise why did you bother making the comment? You are obfuscating, and poorly.

For that matter Mr. Mona may not have anything nice to say about 4e, and with good reason, certainly both the terms of the GSL and the procrastination on the part of WotC on releasing the rancid thing would be enough to sour anyone on the beast - even Necromancer Games in the person of the right honorable Mr. Clark Petersen went from being a vocal 4e supporter to dropping it after WotC hemmed and hawed for six months, then released an overly restrictive license that really only benefited WotC.

So, in lieu of Mr. Mona saying anything positive about a game that he has nothing to in common with, how about I say some incredibly rude, antagonistic, and negative things about the game instead? That way you can actually have something to complain about. And I guarantee that my complaints will be heart felt.

The Auld Grump - 4e is ugly, and its mama dresses it funny.

 

[Tallifer]

Let me approach the question differently.

If Fourth Edition is indeed superseded by a version which appeases the fans of other editions, I pray to God that Wizards opens up the GSL, so that players who enjoy Fourth Edition now can continue to play it.

Players of other editions are very lucky. Because of the OGL, we can play any edition from OD&D to 3.75 without any limitations. I dread the replacement of 4E, because the current restrictions surrounding it will mean it will wither on the vine.

 

[Tallifer]

This is how many people felt when 4E came out. It was tailored to the folks who didn't like 3E and the 3E fans were left hanging. Many of us wanted a new ediition that built on and fixed 3E, not one that was a complete redo of the game. I'd really like to see an edition of D&D that attracts more players to the table from a range of playstyles.

Fortunately, Third Edition fans were not left hanging, because Paizo has supported them without fail since 2008. I hope that Fourth Edition will get the same kind of support in the future, but I have my fears.

 

[Mercutio01]

Fortunately, Third Edition fans were not left hanging, because Paizo has supported them without fail since 2008. I hope that Fourth Edition will get the same kind of support in the future, but I have my fears.

Yes, in hindsight it is fortunate. Certainly didn't feel that way at the time, though. And I say that as someone who was excited for 4E from when it was announced until after it was released for about a year.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Let me approach the question differently.

If Fourth Edition is indeed superseded by a version which appeases the fans of other editions, I pray to God that Wizards opens up the GSL, so that players who enjoy Fourth Edition now can continue to play it.

Players of other editions are very lucky. Because of the OGL, we can play any edition from OD&D to 3.75 without any limitations. I dread the replacement of 4E, because the current restrictions surrounding it will mean it will wither on the vine.

I will second that!

Actually, as I mentioned above, I kind of hope that 5e is an open version of the 4e architecture. I don't think that opening 4e license is likely otherwise - I am sure that some bean counters blame the OGL for [pick one] 4e's Failure/Pathfinder's Success. Mind you, I think that if 4e had an open license then Pathfinder wouldn't be in its current position, if it even existed at all. That the mistake was not in WotC creating the OGL, it was in WotC turning their backs on it.

The Auld Grump

 

[Dausuul]

I will second that!

Actually, as I mentioned above, I kind of hope that 5e is an open version of the 4e architecture. I don't think that opening 4e license is likely otherwise - I am sure that some bean counters blame the OGL for [pick one] 4e's Failure/Pathfinder's Success. Mind you, I think that if 4e had an open license then Pathfinder wouldn't be in its current position, if it even existed at all. That the mistake was not in WotC creating the OGL, it was in WotC turning their backs on it.

The Auld Grump

I expect an OGL version of 4E to show up within two years of 5E's release. Game mechanics cannot be copyrighted, and most of the terminology used in 4E was carried over from previous editions and is thus covered by the OGL. Healing surges and a few other things might have to be renamed, but that's about it.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I expect an OGL version of 4E to show up within two years of 5E's release. Game mechanics cannot be copyrighted, and most of the terminology used in 4E was carried over from previous editions and is thus covered by the OGL. Healing surges and a few other things might have to be renamed, but that's about it.

Oh, come on! If that were the case people would already be doing unauthorized supplements for the game!

Oh, wait a minute....

I was talking more official than unofficial, but you are of course correct - and I notice that WotC has not gone after folks like Jolly Blackburn.

One of the other disadvantages to the GSL - because it offers so little to the 3PP it is more tempting to ignore it.

As for renaming Healing Surges, I have met folks that already do that, simply because they hate the name. (Adrenaline Surge seems a common one.)

The Auld Grump

 

[Tallifer]

I expect an OGL version of 4E to show up within two years of 5E's release. Game mechanics cannot be copyrighted, and most of the terminology used in 4E was carried over from previous editions and is thus covered by the OGL. Healing surges and a few other things might have to be renamed, but that's about it.

I would still miss the on-line resources, but I would accept building and researching characters by hand if a third party could make a cleaned-up compiled version of the most important classes, powers and feats.