D&D 5E L&L - D&D Next Goals, Part One

[GX.Sigma]

The first L&L article of the year is up, and it's a look at the goals of D&D Next.

My favorite part of the article is:

We're going to make an RPG product called Dungeons & Dragons. It will be the game, Dungeons & Dragons, not just a sampler or a game that guides you through making a character and playing a single adventure. You can buy D&D and play a full, tabletop RPG campaign. You will be able to start playing, regardless of experience, and will easily find other products to migrate to if you so desire.

This is exactly what I was expecting/hoping for. Just a little red box called Dungeons & Dragons (not "beginner box," not "basic set") that you can pick up at Toys 'R' Us or Target, and there you go, now you own the game of Dungeons & Dragons. PHB-style stuff can then be a separate product.

Edit: Added link.

 

[Stormonu]

Link to article...

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20130107

 

[Sunseeker]

Generally the PHB-style stuff IS a separate product.

However, I question how complete the rules will be in a Red Box-style product. If the "Red Box" has everything you need to play D&D to your heart's content...what's the point in additional product? Generally speaking, the "Red Box" has been fairly limited in it's size and scope.

 

[Argyle King]

I think it is a noble goal. The way they spoke of that goal in the beginning made me feel pretty good about the next edition.

That being said, if what we're seeing now with the playtest is what's intended to be that core, I'm not sure what I think. I think there are currently some parts which lean too heavily toward one style or another to be as modular as (supposedly) desired. It might very well be that a later supplement tips the scale and causes something to lean a different way, but I believe that approach will cause problems as more supplements become available. With too much swaying back and forth, I worry about something of a Jenga effect crumbling a campaign to the ground. As such, I believe the strength of the core game is something which needs to be heavily looked at. There are some great companies out there who have created fantastic modular systems, but I'm uncertain if I feel the current D&D design process will meet the challenges that some of the peers have. I hope things do turn out well; I really do, but -as things currently stand- I'm somewhat skeptical.

I also have some concern about how bare bones the core product will be. Some of the other modular games I alluded to are modular, but they still have rather robust core sets which allow me to do a lot before I need more content. For me, a question that remains is "how many modules will I need to run what I want to run?" Also, when will the style of rpg I want be possible with D&D? The next edition isn't due out for a while, and previous interviews have lead me to believe that some of the options which are important to me won't even be looked at until quite a while after the game as released. I accept that because I realize that some of my tastes are in the minority when in comes to the D&D community. Though, while I may accept it, I do still ponder how much time it will take for the game to do what I'd like a rpg to be able to do.

 

[Stormonu]

This is one of those things that I'll believe it when I see it. I'm afraid I'm too skeptical it will work out at this point from what I'm seeing of the playtests. Doesn't seem WotC can unite everybody on this thing - or even a majority.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I question how complete the rules will be in a Red Box-style product. If the "Red Box" has everything you need to play D&D to your heart's content...what's the point in additional product? Generally speaking, the "Red Box" has been fairly limited in it's size and scope.

Probably 4 races, 4 classes, 10 levels. Likely skills, maybe feats.

 

[GX.Sigma]

if what we're seeing now with the playtest is what's intended to be that core, I'm not sure what I think.

From Mike Mearls on Twitter:

Keep in mind that the current packet is several steps away from the core/basic game. It's more complex than intended for quick play

Edit: Oop, accidentally made it a separate post. I guess I can't delete this.

 

[Argyle King]

So the core of the game will be less complex than currently seen?

That makes me even less sure of what I think.

 

[The Shadow]

I for one am getting frustrated at hearing yet more about their big-picture goals when we've heard it all before. I want to hear some more details, darnit!

 

[A'koss]

Hopefully when they publish the more "advanced" rules, they incorporate the core rules into it so we're not having to reference several different books just to achieve a baseline "AD&D" experience.