D&D (2024) Hypothetical Direction Shift For 1D&D/6E

[TheSword]

Its risky for Wizbro to add monsters, classes, feats, spells, (pc options), and adventures?

I mean the only real risk in your list that Wizbro ISNT or has not already done, is Items, and thats because their system is so barebones, it hardly supports it mathematically.

Why can't, or hasnt, Wizbro already dominated those other markets completely if the 3PP's are able to, and how is it a risk?

Changing those things to the point they are no longer compatible is a risk.

 

[Remathilis]

I sincerely doubt 1DnD will change directions.

However. I could totally see a VTT that runs another version of 4e (with bounded accuracy).

Call it DnD: Tactics.

If you are familiar with Magic the Gathering, think about how Arena is close to, but not exactly, like paper Magic. There is no multiplayer (1v1 duels), many formats aren't supported (Commander, Pioneer, Modern and such) but they have "kinda close" versions (Singleton, Historic/Explorer, etc). They also do things that you can't do with paper like certain random mechanics or changing how cards work with functional errata (alchemy) you can't do in paper. It is an experience that is like playing Magic, but not exactly like playing Magic.

I expect the VTT will function in a similar vein. It will be similar to playing the TT version, but rules will be altered to take advantage of the digital medium, not all types of play will be supported, and it will be close to playing a regular TT rpg, but it won't be exactly. And I think they will bank that the pretty graphics and drop-in/drop-out style of play will more than make up for things lost like homebrewing or such.

 

[Scribe]

Changing those things to the point they are no longer compatible is a risk.

Well, yes.

 

[TheSword]

Well, yes.

Is this kind of comment necessary or constructive. The thread asks what would need to change to differentiate 6e. I gave my list.

 

[Scribe]

Is this kind of comment necessary or constructive. The thread asks what would need to change to differentiate 6e. I gave my list.

I had misunderstood your comment earlier, my apologies.

 

[mellored]

I expect the VTT will function in a similar vein. It will be similar to playing the TT version, but rules will be altered to take advantage of the digital medium, not all types of play will be supported, and it will be close to playing a regular TT rpg, but it won't be exactly. And I think they will bank that the pretty graphics and drop-in/drop-out style of play will more than make up for things lost like homebrewing or such.

Do you mean a VTT for 5e? I expect that will have both DM and scripted modes.

Scripted modes being like never winter nights or baldur's gate, but online.

But for 4e, it needs a remake.

• The core math needs to be changed to not have such huge numbers (i.e. Bounded Accuracy).
• Keep the grid with all the positioning, area, and zones based powers.
• Keep all the powers being "damage + effects".
• Keep healing surges.
• Mostly keep AEDU, but it could probably be loosened up a bit (i.e. wizards get a few more daily powers, fighters have more at-wills.).
• Keep short rests, goes along with the above 2.
• Out-of-turn actions need to be trimmed a bit as well.
• Psionics needs something to prevent spamming the same thing each turn. Like an increasing cost. Maybe apply it to all at-wills.
• Computer aided dice rolls and math make keeping track of 15 different buffs and debuffs easy and fast. So overall complexity should still be there.

 

[Raith5]

I wonder how impactful the OGL debacle will really be - most people I play with who are not in these forums have not heard about it.

But I do think it sharpens the preexisting need for there to be a clear value add of the new rules. There has to be a reason for people to make the shift. This involves making rules more VTT friendly - which to my mind involves and increasing number of tactical combat options.

I think we may see a turn back to modularity - things that can be turned off on the VTT or ignored at the table - which add value for specific groups.

 

[John Lloyd1]

Okay, listed my dream of an updated SAGA version, but, keeping with the

I would argue that, if they did take this approach, they'd need to rethink classes. Current classes exist in a void, and make the most sense in the traditional dungeon-crawl environment. Adding more of a focus on story, likely taking place outside of a dungeon environment and with characters designed more as literary or cinematic heroes, would necessitate defining better roles for characters that place them within a world. "Knight", for example, has greater meaning that "dude who charges from horseback"; it has a societal role that is equally as important as how it fights.

I think the Bonds, Ideals, etc was meant to provide some of that. I don't know if it hit the mark.

It should be optional though. It doesn't get much use in adventurer's league, for example.