How would you do 5th edition D&D?

Najo

First Post
Ok, so lets say 4-6 years have gone by. 4th edition and 3rd edition held on to their perspective customer bases. Pathfinder has built up its own following of 3.5 fans wanting new "official" style materials. 4e has brought in new blood but alienate some old blood. 3.5 was supported in weird places through the OGL.

Now, your the D&D brand manager, 5th edition is put in your lap. Your goal is to bring all of these groups together and make WOTC the most successful version of D&D yet. What do you specifically do to D&D to keep the previous customers, get more new ones and bring back those that strayed?

How do you handle core mechanics, what do you change?
What do you do with races? With classes?
What do you do with fighters, rogues, clerics and wizards?
Do you handle everything as powers or make seperate melee and spellcaster abilities into two different categories? Do you do something else?

How do you handle...
Monsters?
Minions?
Hit Points?
Heal Surges?
Encounters?
Skill Challenges?
Skills?
Magic Items?
Conditions?
Bonus Types?
Combat?
Prestige Classes or Paragon Paths?
Feats?
Class Powers or Talent Trees?
Action points?

Do you create a starter set? Do you keep the 3 core books? What material goes into the PHB?

How do you plan out and execute 5th edition D&D? How do you market it? What else do you do to build the D&D brand?
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

I'd make a 5E that catered primarily to D&D's strengths:
1) On-the-fly improvisation and exploration.
2) Worldbuilding and customisation.

The former caters to what D&D (and other P&P RPGs) can do that no other media can, and cuts out that bugbear that alienates the game away from the mainstream - "prep time". It emphasises the heart of the D&D game - adventure and exploration, and if improvised adventure is somehow made practical and fun....well, that's just huge.

The second caters to what everyone ends up doing with the game anyway, so may as well face the music: worldbuilding is the game within the game...and customisation gets players invested in the game by making it their own.

This would manifest with an MM and DMG devoted heart and soul to running the game on the fly, and a PHB devoted to "design your own elven subraces" and "design your own wizard schools" type material for customised flavour and worldbuilding purposes.

D&D is used as a fantasy world simulator, and when people simulate fantasy worlds they stamp their personalities on them. A game that supports this and makes it easy to do rather than trying to fight it or pretend it's not the case would be a watershed IMO.

Additionally, the live DM is an asset that no CRPG nor movie can emulate. This should ideally be leveraged through improvisation support to the nth degree. Combat time would have to be minimised in order to leave more time for exploration and loot collecting (ala the LEGO Star Wars, Batman and Indiana Jones games, which have taught me something important about D&D). Running on the fly would be the new default, and prep time a thing of the past, though I have little idea how to achieve that.

Hopefully that's not just a bunch of motherhood statements, but a game which fulfills such design goals is bound to generate D&D's lifeblood, which is a whole lot of fanatics, and a whole lot more people playing the game. Get this stuff right and the splats and minis would most likely sell themselves.
 


Ok, so lets say 4-6 years have gone by.

Okay, in that case, 5e will look very much like a "4.5 edition". It would only be called 5e because of the backlash caused by the 3.5 version of the game.

If, instead, we wait 8-9 years, I think the time would be right for a more significant revision of the game.

At that time, I'm inclined to think that it will again be right to go for a 'back to basics' version of the game, harkening back to 1e rather more than is currently the case, and once again emphasising the "back to the dungeon" meme. Also, I think it would probably be aimed right at the core base of D&D, and less at the newer players.

Now, your the D&D brand manager, 5th edition is put in your lap. Your goal is to bring all of these groups together

In all honesty, I think this would be folly. Rather, I'd be inclined to go for a broad middle ground that gets most of the 4e players and most of the remaining 3e/Pathfinder players. (I think this latter might well require a renewed dedication to an OGL-style license, as opposed to the more closed GSL, and may require Paizo being brought back on-side. This latter may simply be impossible if Pathfinder remains a success.)

How do you handle core mechanics, what do you change?

If by 'core mechanics', you mean "roll d20, add modifiers, beat DC", then nothing. If you instead mean the layout of feats, powers and such, then I'm not immediately sure. I'm not keen on the 4e paradigm, but it clearly works, and mostly works quite well.

What do you do with races? With classes?
What do you do with fighters, rogues, clerics and wizards?

In the core book, only Humans, Elves (inc Eladrin), Dwarves and Halflings are included. Likewise, only Cleric, Fighter, Rogue and Wizard are supported.

Very soon after the publication of the core rulebook would come an expansion detailing a further 4-6 races and 4-6 classes.

Do you handle everything as powers or make seperate melee and spellcaster abilities into two different categories? Do you do something else?

Rather than daily/encounter/at-will powers, I'd be inclined to switch to a mix of per-encounter and per-adventure balancing. I'd probably also switch to a mana-based system, so that a Wizard that really needs to cast Sleep twice in a day can do so.

However, I'm no game designer, so this model might fail utterly.

How do you handle...
Monsters?
Minions?

Much as in 4e. I like the design here.

Hit Points?

Split the pool in 2. One half refreshes with a short rest. The other only refreshes after extensive recuperation (it's a per-adventure resource). Healing spells and effects mostly only apply to the per-encounter pool.

Heal Surges?

Second wind would remain largely as-in in 4e (might change to a move action). Similarly Cleric prayers that trigger the spending of surges. However, these would apply only to the per-encounter pool of hit points. Also, there would be no limit on the number of surges that could be spent in a day.

Encounters?
Skill Challenges?

As in 4e. I like the design here. Although I'd fix the math on Skill Challenges. And by 'fix the math' I don't mean apply the current or similar patch - I'd get someone to run the numbers in great detail to get the desired results. The concept behind Skill Challenges is genius. The implementation, not so much.


Bring back skill ranks, but allow only 1 rank per level (not lv + 3). Merge several skills to produce a shorter list of more general skills.

Magic Items?

Split these into trinkets (what were potions, scrolls and wands) and 'real' items. Trinkets would be considered to be easily available. Other items would be hard to get, much more mysterious, and hard to identify. The game would be balanced on the assumption that PCs have few if any such items.

The DM's section of the core rulebook would advise DMs to generate custom items for their group, and provide extensive advice on how to generate such items. Example items would necessarily be few, but would quickly be expanded in a supplemental book of treasures.

All existing 'real' items would be retired (barring conversion guidelines).

Conditions?
Bonus Types?

Much as in 3e, but with the list cut down and simplified. I would advocate no more than 7 bonus types, for example. I don't like the 4e paradigm of 'feat bonus', 'power bonus', and so forth.

Prestige Classes or Paragon Paths?

As in 4e, or eliminated entirely. Classes should, however, be more customisable in general.

Class Powers or Talent Trees?

Talent Trees. Probably.

Action points?

As in 4e, including the use of milestones, though I might call these something else.

Do you create a starter set? Do you keep the 3 core books? What material goes into the PHB?

One core rulebook, of no more than 250 pages. Text density can be a little higher than the 4e core rules, though. This needs to cover the core of the game, and do so in such a way that expansion is easy and doesn't require redefinition of game elements. This book will include 4 core races and 4 core classes, enough material for the first tier (actually, I'd bring back the BECM tiers, and cover the first two in the core rulebook, extending to level 14). The list of powers would necessarily be limited, as would the options for magic items and monsters.

The Starter Set would hit the stores at the same time as the core rulebook, and would in fact include the very same core rulebook, plus an assortment of PC and monster tokens (or minis), dungeon tiles, a book of sample adventures, dice, and whatever else seems useful. It would be much like the starter boxes for "Warhammer Fantasy Battles" or "Warhammer 40,000" in that respect. I'd probably re-do the Starter Set every year or two to try to draw in new blood, but the core rulebook would remain the same.

Very soon after the first books are out, I would issue the "Advanced Player's Handbook" (covering additional races and classes, lots more powers and other character options, and the rest of the level range), the "Advanced Dungeon Master's Guide" (lots of advice on running games, preparing games, and so on, plus sample traps, treasures, and various other things), and the "Bestiary" (the rest of the monsters). Possibly also the "Grimoire" (spells and other powers) and "Tome of Treasures" (magic items and such), depending on how much material was generated. However, each of these books would be mostly modular (albeit assuming the full level range is being used), and each would also be strictly optional.

How do you plan out and execute 5th edition D&D? How do you market it? What else do you do to build the D&D brand?

This depends very much on how the DI does. If it succeeds, it probably safeguards the future of the game indefinately. If it fails, or is a marginal success, then a different approach would be required. It's hard to imagine what that approach might be - in 8-9 years the FLGS might be a thing of the past, or they might have been saved by a new 'Magic' phenomenon.

In closing: there may be one or two good ideas here. I'm aware that there are also a whole bunch of really bad ideas in here, and I have no way of sorting them out. And I'm not sure how much of this is based on my opinions of 4e, about which I am more than a little sceptical. So, make of it what you will.

Also, isn't it rather early for a "how to do 5e" thread? :)
 

1. Cull every edition for good ideas. Don't be afraid to keep the best ideas from each edition, and toss them into the melting pot.

2. Remember that verisimilitude is not a dirty word, and is important to some playstyles.

3. Combat must be faster, and faster combat cannot rely upon a grid. Sorry, but writing the game to sell minis must go. Cubical fireballs are.....(shudder).

4. Focus more on fast play and improv, and less on perfect balance. The primary strength to the resource-management paradigm is that it can hold up under less rigorous balance, because encounters are not expected to be balanced against a party at full resources. This is something to strongly consider.

5. Make the game OGL. There are some customers you will never get back without it.

6. Tone down the Wahoo! elements. Speaking of which, Pathfinder folks, if you're listening, "More Wahoo! than 3.5!" isn't the direction I think you should be going.

7. EDIT: Art style. I have come to believe that the mishmash of art styles in 1e and earlier was a good thing. If one piece didn't grab you, another one would. D&D needs truly evocative art (rather than merely illustrative art).
 
Last edited:

Now, your the D&D brand manager, 5th edition is put in your lap. Your goal is to bring all of these groups together and make WOTC the most successful version of D&D yet.

I would quit and look for work elsewhere. D&D doesn't need a "brand" manager, because it shouldn't be treated just like a brand and treated more like a game for gamers. This is one of the flaws WotC has had. Scott does a good job, but sorry; I don't see things as just labels and despise that whole thought process behind selling a brand instead of a quality product.

The only reason I buy McRibs, is because Burger King didn't have a rib-like sandwich.

Also I don't think WotC is the right company to make D&D. It's interests lie elsewhere than RPGs and more resources and time seem to be devoted to those other places, likewise I would not want to be, not have D&D any longer anywhere near HASBRO.

Also I think the brand manager is not the one who decides the direction of the game, but just takes the product and makes sure that people are aware and happy with it, and makes all other departments work together rather than any design decisions.

Which is why it seems Scott is slow getting the new GSL out, because his part seems to be done, but he has to give a swift kick in the ass to another group to get around to it while trying to coordinate all the other departments and marketing and such together.

So with those two things out of the way (brand over game, not Scott; just the idea).....

I would first removed "everything is core" and its confusion.

Core would be three books, or more properly ONE book like the Rules Compendium.

The easier the game is to play at its core and less paperwork it takes to hold the complete game then the more people that may play it. Dependning on costs at the time it might be $60 for that one book, but a group would really only need one to start playing, and they can pitch in and pick up more down the road for the individual players if needed/wanted.

Next I would bring back boxed sets.

Having a campaign settings all in a book makes it easier to carry, but the maps are something needed for a settings, and should not be something extra you have to buy in "Fancy Locations" packages.

Setting specific minis would be included for Iconic characters in the boxed set along with the settings maps. Minis may be pogs, token, fold-ups etc, but they would be something in the box so people don't have to go fumbling to buy extra product to complete their gaming experience. The boxed set has everything you need in the box! Including a pencil, set of dice, and a character sheet you can photocopy!

Those wanting digital boxed sets can buy them cheaper, but the maps would be sold separately since not everyone can print 1440000 bit graphics! Of course no digital pencils or dice...that is why the digital copy of the boxed set is cheaper because it takes a LOT less production costs since there is no physical product.

Spellplague never existed. Nor did 4th edition Realms changes of ANY kind.

Eberron is removed from core, and the warforged die out and can only live in on Eberron from published products. Players can add them where ever they want, but settings specific oddities belong in those published settings only.

Offspring of dragon rape are gone, and offspring of orc rape return.

So the core will be core, and what has been core through the MOST editions, and all other things will be thrown into supplements.

Barbarians, Monks, Druids core...psionics may just be gone for good unless they fit somehow for player use. That would include monsters too. I am looking at you mind-flayers, brain moles, and amethyst dragons!

Yuppie elves with they fey-step are also gone from core, and dark elves return. Not really Drow, but dark elves. Kinda a Yin and yang with light and dark elves.

Half races would exist in core. Where the hell is the half-dwarf? Who doesn't like a 200 pound short woman with hair on her chin you can hang on to?

You are no longer JUST a monster RAWR, gnomes return to core.

Gods interfere with the world and George Bush and his 1000 points of light gaming are gone! (It was just the affects of the cocaine anyway.)

I don't know how much more this post can hold, so will stop here and may return with more ideas later.

to be continued.....
 
Last edited:

A)Produce a "beta game released almost a year before on the net to get people excited and get wide, shallow playtesting. (I knida hate Paizo and PF, but this was a good idea.)

B)Produce 2 D&D lines again. "Basic" and "Advanced"

Both lines would use the same core mechanics, things like charging, and Conditions and hp would mean the same thing. Heck, I'd design momnsters so they were cross compatible.

Basic would have crunch that leaned towards simulation and "player challenging" play. It would remove all grid-based rules too.

Advanced would look similar to 4e.
 

First, I'd realize my job depends on the game being profitable, so while noble-sounding things like "designing the game for gamers" certainly have their place, reality must be considered as well.

Second, I would not just design the game based on my personal preferences. I realize that my personal preferences likely do not reflect the preferences of the majority of players. Feedback received over the past several editions would need to be considered in detail. If most people aren't stuffed that gnomes are in the MM, so be it.

Third, beta playtesting would be a good idea I think, in order to help accomplish the second point.
 

1. Cull every edition for good ideas. Don't be afraid to keep the best ideas from each edition, and toss them into the melting pot.

2. Remember that verisimilitude is not a dirty word, and is important to some playstyles.

3. Combat must be faster, and faster combat cannot rely upon a grid. Sorry, but writing the game to sell minis must go. Cubical fireballs are.....(shudder).

4. Focus more on fast play and improv, and less on perfect balance. The primary strength to the resource-management paradigm is that it can hold up under less rigorous balance, because encounters are not expected to be balanced against a party at full resources. This is something to strongly consider.

5. Make the game OGL. There are some customers you will never get back without it.

6. Tone down the Wahoo! elements. Speaking of which, Pathfinder folks, if you're listening, "More Wahoo! than 3.5!" isn't the direction I think you should be going.

7. EDIT: Art style. I have come to believe that the mishmash of art styles in 1e and earlier was a good thing. If one piece didn't grab you, another one would. D&D needs truly evocative art (rather than merely illustrative art).

Yep. Pretty much agree. Though (and this may tie into #1 on your list):

* relegate the dragonborn and tiefling to non-core. Maybe the eladrin too (if not, remove the fey step ability and replace with something else)

* powers are gone. If we gotta do something like powers instead of class abilities (as in pre 4e), then talent trees akin to Star Wars Saga

* No more "I rest for 6 hours and all my hit points are restored" (it doesnt matter what hp represent in this incarnation or any incarnation of the game; it's kinda stupid they all come back after just 6 hours no matter if you only have 1 left out of 100 possible)

Probably more I can think of...just those come to mind at the moment.

But I do agree with #3 above. So PCs have more stuff to choose from and combat rounds are faster or combat consists of more rounds...it still shouldn't take an hour to resolve a single encounter (final fight with 'major boss' monster notwithstanding).

Four hours of game play shouldn't consist of maybe 4 encounters...at least in my opinion. (I mentioned this in another thread...in the 1e/2e days you could go through an entire addy in a four hour session...start to finish, even if finish included running away, healing, time passing, and then returning to the dungeon to continue kicking ass)
 

1) I wouldn't be caught dead having to make decisions that would effect this community of very opinionated people.

2) Idealy: Tell them to throw out the brand name before doing anything else. This has nothing to do with exactly who owns the name. This has to do with the fact that D&D is now larger than anything one company can hope to encompass in a single game system. D&D as a brand made by one company should be retired. The game should be given to the fans to go off and do whatever they want with it. It's not like it'd be much different then what we have now.

Plus I'd love it if D&D was no longer a real king of PnP RPGs. I feel like every other game has to stand in its shadow and it would be nice if it fell from dominance.
 

Remove ads

Top