How would you do 5th edition D&D?

[Charwoman Gene]

Let it rest in piece like its creator with what dignity it has left.

If you feel that way, stop playing it's mockeries and posting on messageboards, it's the only way to be respectful.

 

[Afrodyte]

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.

This is really interesting, and I'd like to see someone take this and run with it.

 

[fuindordm]

Honestly, I think 4E got 80% of the way there but made some drastic and unnecessary changes that spoiled the product for me.

Its most pressing problem is the fact that every class has exactly the same structure, and very similar combat powers for the most part. The only possible reason for creating such uniformity was to create a beautifully flexible multiclassing system, but that never materialized. Paragon paths were a similarly pretty idea that got dashed on the rocks of perfect combat balance.

To me, the perfect edition would keep an awful lot of 4E, but get rid of the uniform power structure. I think that talent trees are the best way of organizing class abilities we've seen so far--I originally hoped that 4E would be 3E with talent trees accounting for about half of all class abilities.

But 4E came up with lots of original ideas I like: daily/encounter/at-will, HP, healing surges, skills and challenges, rituals (mostly), the new monsters, and quite a lot of inspiring flavor. So the next edition would still look more like 4E than 3E, I think. Mainly, it would have more flexible and more strongly distinguished classes with plently of powers that add more flavor than damage.

 

[Afrodyte]

To me, the perfect edition would keep an awful lot of 4E, but get rid of the uniform power structure. I think that talent trees are the best way of organizing class abilities we've seen so far--I originally hoped that 4E would be 3E with talent trees accounting for about half of all class abilities.

That would be so cool.

Is anybody working on something like this?

 

[Fallen Seraph]

To be blunt I would fail miserably, when it comes to trying to reconcile everything together into a new 5e. Since well my personal path for taking D&D wouldn't be at all what other people would like to see.

Basically;

-Completely separate fluff and crunch. Have specific crunch books and specific fluff books.

-Continue the idea of D&D being based around storytelling and the PCs that came to focus in 4e. So make rules, guidelines, etc. that help with this, ie; instead of Per-Encounter it be say... Per Scene.

-Keep exception-based design, Skill Challenges (but probably even more indepth/more variety of methods), Powers (more variety on the usage of a power, ie; mechanics for using it in Skill Challenges or along side a Skill, etc.), Minions, Healing Surges, etc, etc. all still in.

-Keep the races and classes from 4e, but be very crunch oriented, hardly any fluff. Bring back old-Tiefling variety chart (but without having to roll for it).

-Allow guidelines/side rules for less regular fantasy games, ie; technology, psionics, etc.

There be more but that be a start.

 

[Najo]

I appreciate everyone's input so far and feel there is some very good ideas in here. I understand some people can have some strong feelings about WOTC, 4e and what is the perception of big business changing the game they love. Let's please keep the thread on track and avoid anti-wotc statements mixed in with our discussions.

As for clarifying the role of Brand Manager:

A brand is more than the "brand" logo. It is the entire spirit and product lines tied to the property that is the "brand".

How do you market the brand?

What products do you create under the brand?

What company's products do you license to the brand?

How do you keep the brand's core customers happy while gaining the brand new customers?

All of this includes making decisions on how to make the brand as successful (in both popularity and profitability) as possible. Without popularity the brand disappears, without profitability...the brand disappears.

The Brand Manager plans all this out, gets approval to do it and then has the design teams get it done.

Scott please feel free to correct anything I might have wrong.

 

[El Mahdi]

How would I do 5th Edition D&D?

I wouldn't even begin to speculate on what form the mechanics would take for a new edition. I think that with time (couple of years or more), we'll have a better idea of what 4E machanics work for players and which ones don't. Until then, I wouldn't even attempt to predict where the general preferences of the customer base will lean.

Some may not feel their will ever be a 5th edtion, or a need for a 5th edition. My thoughts are that there will be a 5th edition, but only when it becomes economically feasible, warranted, and needed from a business perspective (WoTC perspective). In other words, when 4E sales have declined to the point where they need a 5th edition to generate new revenue.

So, with the impetus for a new edition being market driven, and my reticence to make specific predictions on the future mechanics of said system, the only predictions I'd make would be this: 5th edition will return to the Open Gaming concept; and although I don't know which ones will be preferred, the majority of mechanics will be culled from all editions (rather than making all new, ground up mechanics).

For multiple reasons, I think going back to the Open Gaming concept for the next edition would be the only way to make it sellable. It would give the appearance of openess after a more restrictive model, and it would breathe new blood and energy back into the game from 3pp and gamer feedback (assuming that this occurs as 4E is winding down).

Now, 6th Edition, in 15 to 20 years, will return to a more restrictive licensing model like we see now. 5E will give WoTC (or whoever else may own the property by then) all the feedback they need for 6th edition, leaving a system that doesn't need to be as open.


Now, someone else re-type this thread into a poetic, prophetic form - print it out - and put it in a time capsule for 10 years from now. Might be interesting to read then.


signed

NostraDMus

 

[pawsplay]

Unfortunately, as 5e brand manager, I would find myself in the same position as the 4e team: there is an entire fanbase out there who already loves the game. So I would probably start with 4e as a skeleton: half a point of bonus each level, distinct classes, fewer powers and combat options to juggle, adjusted hit point levels, etc. Then I would mercilessly strip out the power system and figure out how to give each class a distinctive feel, while also preserving roles and allowing characters to be somewhat self-sufficient.

 

[justanobody]

As for clarifying the role of Brand Manager:

A brand is more than the "brand" logo. It is the entire spirit and product lines tied to the property that is the "brand".

How do you market the brand?

What products do you create under the brand?

What company's products do you license to the brand?

How do you keep the brand's core customers happy while gaining the brand new customers?

All of this includes making decisions on how to make the brand as successful (in both popularity and profitability) as possible. Without popularity the brand disappears, without profitability...the brand disappears.

The Brand Manager plans all this out, gets approval to do it and then has the design teams get it done.

Scott please feel free to correct anything I might have wrong.

All the more reason the new GSL is so slow, because he has all those other people to futz with and get in his way.

I would rather be a designer, than brand manager then.

 

[Dausuul]

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?

To keep the previous customers (4E players), I build on the strengths of the existing system; flexible and extensible design, tactical versatility, rigorous mathematical balance. Examples:
* Address the problem of powers that auto-kill minions (such as most wall or cloud spells).
* Address the issue of the "at-will slog" which sometimes happens toward the end of a fight, probably by providing some means to recover encounter powers during combat.
* Increase "situational awareness" in power design; try to design powers such that, while each power is useful in almost any situation, each also gets bonuses in certain specific situations, particularly terrain-related (AoE fire attacks ignite flammable stuff, a push-back attack might turn into a knockdown in difficult terrain, et cetera). This encourages players to be creative in setting up those situations.

To get more new ones, I emphasize simplicity and ease of play, further reducing the amount of number-crunching involved and trimming out some of the more complicated systems. Examples:
* Remove or simplify daily magic item powers.
* Re-work the healing surge mechanic so that it's intuitively clear how it works.
* Make the one-half level bonus an inherent part of the ability score modifier; there should never be any mechanic that uses the ability mod without the one-half level bonus.

To bring back at least a few of those that strayed (3.X and Pathfinder players), I address some of their concerns, with the caveat that the goal is not to return to 3.X and the core of the system is not going to change. Examples:
* Provide a loose definition of hit points as "will to fight on," and ensure that mechanics and nomenclature are in line with this definition, which will hopefully satisfy those who dislike meta-narrative concepts. (Those who want gritty, non-heroic combat are SOL.)
* Reduce the emphasis on precise tactical movement, with the aim of returning to a pre-3E level of "grid reliance." At first glance, this would seem to conflict with the above "situational awareness," but I don't think it actually does. The goal is not to reduce interaction with terrain, but to reduce the need to know exactly which square everybody is in.
* Expand the power-related fluff text a bit, and make sure there's a halfway plausible explanation for each power doing what it does.