D&D 5E Maybe D&D Should Branch?

[Mark CMG]

While I'm another over-40 4e fan, I do find myself gaming with a younger and less homogeneously-longtime-D&Der crowd under 4e than I did under 3e. So, I can see where the impression comes from. 3.5/Pathfinder games I see happening at the FLGS (one each) have a more uniformly 30+ crowd (even a couple over 60), while the 4e games have a lot more 20-somethings and a sprinkling of actual kids (but still are about half gamers who, like me, started playing in the previous millennium).

One phenomenon I find heartening is that you see families gaming. You'll have a dad who gamed back in the day, and he brings his kids to play.

The longest running group game at my FLGS (in business for thirty years and the group about that old, as a group) currently plays PF and includes gamers from 20 to 50 (approx), including a father and his two late teen/young-20s sons. Of the 4E games I regularly see, one is a young 30s DM with players from mid-teens to early 40s while another 4E game has mostly 30-somethings. I think the Encounters games tend to skew younger, from what I have seen, and my own weekly game which switches between many systems includes early-20s players (most of the players are in this age segment) but with some early-30s and a couple of players in their late 40s/early 50s. There's another 3.5/PF group (they seem to switch off) that is mostly 30-somethings. This is just on two of the seven days their nine game tables are open or scheduled for games. There are also a lot of wargamers, FoW, WH, Hordes, etc. plus clixers using those tables, and a handful of nights when it is almost all boardgamers and a handful when there is a lot of card games.

 

[Mark CMG]

Another thought. WOTC has announced that they are going to have the entire catalog from the past available as pdf files.

Nope. They've announced that even as 5E comes along they will be making efforts to have much of their previous edition material available in electronic format. Their avoidance of mentioning PDFs seemed purposeful. Considering the 4E stuff is already quite available in electronic format and having the 3.0/3.5 material available in SRD format would take little effort, I don't personally expect to see a lot more than that. If it was a change of heart regarding the PDFs they had available for so long during the Era 3.5, they could take care of all that in a few days by dropping the PDFs back onto RPGNow since I am sure they still have the coding saved (they'd just need to hand over the actual PDFs and give the word). While there were a few complaints regarding the quality of the scans and PDFs, most folks understood that given time and the tech of the time, that was about as good as it would get. A simple disclaimer to that effect included this time around and it could be sorted out before the weekend. I doubt we'll ever see those PDFs again or an initiative like that in the future. I'd guess they'll keep the 4E DDI in place for as long as they think they have to to keep 4E fans from crying foul and the older material we'll see will come in the form of rehashes of old setting and adventures as updated to whatever 5E turns out to be, along the lines of the "Return to X" stuff and the Saltmarsh rehash in the 3.5 DMG2. What we'll likely see is a 5E DDI (or whatever they call it) with some retreading some old setting and adventure ground to draw in longtime fans of those IPs. Don't expect those old PDFs to come back.

 

[Tony Vargas]

It was my impression that 5E was meant to be a new tree with many branches all in the same set of rules under the D&D brand.

Maybe a new tree with many roots?

 

[Mark CMG]

Maybe a new tree with many roots?

Roots that match the branches then? The idea that different tables will be able to use 5E to play D&D in many different ways is the hype, no?

 

[Emerikol]

Nope. They've announced that even as 5E comes along they will be making efforts to have much of their previous edition material available in electronic format. Their avoidance of mentioning PDFs seemed purposeful.

They mentioned it would be purchasable so I assumed pdf's. Some obtainable format then. I do not think it is just more stuff on DDI.

 

[Mark CMG]

They mentioned it would be purchasable so I assumed pdf's. Some obtainable format then. I do not think it is just more stuff on DDI.

I don't recall "purchasable" being a specific word used but I suppose WotC would consider the DDI as a "purchasable" electronic format.

 

[Emerikol]

I don't recall "purchasable" being a specific word used but I suppose WotC would consider the DDI as a "purchasable" electronic format.

I wouldn't. I'd consider it a rentable format but not a purchasable one. When I stop paying I don't have it anymore. If though I can download it outside the DDI then I'd say it was. I doubt they'd do that. Everyone would signup for a month download everything and then stop paying.

 

[Emerikol]

Roots that match the branches then? The idea that different tables will be able to use 5E to play D&D in many different ways is the hype, no?

I think group to group it could work. At least well enough for many. Player to player within the group I don't think it's possible. You won't have a 4e guy with a 3e guy on SOME issues. Obviously on other issues there will be possibilities. Class complexity really is a personal decision. Process sim vs narrativist though is a table decision not an individual decision.

 

[Mark CMG]

I wouldn't. I'd consider it a rentable format but not a purchasable one. When I stop paying I don't have it anymore. If though I can download it outside the DDI then I'd say it was. I doubt they'd do that. Everyone would signup for a month download everything and then stop paying.

I thought you could download bundled DDI stuff like compiled Dragon/Dungeon mags and others. Certainly you can copy/paste material you pay for to other formats, print screens, etc. That material, though not the newer programs, remains your own for as long as you wish.

 

[Mark CMG]

I think group to group it could work. At least well enough for many. Player to player within the group I don't think it's possible. You won't have a 4e guy with a 3e guy on SOME issues. Obviously on other issues there will be possibilities. Class complexity really is a personal decision. Process sim vs narrativist though is a table decision not an individual decision.

Yeah, the jury is out on what will actually work until it is released. My question is if that what they are saying it is going to do.