D&D 5E (2024) Mearls has some Interesting Ideals about how to fix high level wizards.

[Zardnaar]

Two years is an exaggeration. MAYBE one extra year. The biggest thing that would make a difference is having an actual schedule with internal deadlines, rather than (as you say, something that's happened three editions running) "we dithered and dithered for a year and a half doing 20% of the game, and then had to rush the remaining 80% through the last six months so we didn't miss our publication date".


Then perhaps they should (a) actually PLAN for that? If they know a 3-year development cycle isn't enough, perhaps they need to reconsider how they do the planning for a new edition so they don't keep NEEDING to rush things out the door?

Wasted time and lack of discipline are a problem to be addressed, most assuredly. They are not an excuse for why we shouldn't bother doing actually rigorous design work.


You almost certainly would not though. You "could" accidentally destroy your fanbase permanently with something that got rave reviews but which actual players HATE HATE HATE. "Could" is not a useful metric here.


Leaks are gonna happen no matter what. They happened with both 4e and 5e. What makes you think that would be a special problem this time?

4E leak was a day or 3 before release.

A near complete final playtest version though is a bit different.

5E they didnt know what people wanted. They listened to forums and a few RPGA members for 4E.

Gor 6Epersonally I would have my engine ready day 1. 5E engine coukd be used to Cline any edition to a large extent so tinker with that and poll for the big things eg simplicity vs complex for fast vs slow, gritty vs easier.

 

[mamba]

5E still got rushed

as did 5.5

 

[EzekielRaiden]

5E they didnt know what people wanted.

Perhaps that's something they should...I dunno...do a CRAPTON of work on before they even begin thinking about a new edition then?

Several of the problems you bring up are sounding a lot more like "designers don't actually know how to do design" rather than "the thing you're talking about is completely impossible, nobody could ever do that thing".

 

[Zardnaar]

Perhaps that's something they should...I dunno...do a CRAPTON of work on before they even begin thinking about a new edition then?

Several of the problems you bring up are sounding a lot more like "designers don't actually know how to do design" rather than "the thing you're talking about is completely impossible, nobody could ever do that thing".

Designers do the best they can. They still have to follow the directives from above. Here's your budget here's your time frame go.

 

[Zardnaar]

as did 5.5

Two years for a revision is typical. That's 5 years total.

Gives you an idea why you can't design a perfect edition on release. 5 years work and hundreds of thousands of responses maybe more.

 

[Horwath]

as did 5.5

5.5e was a wasted opportunity.
barely an errata disguised as revision to sell books.
we got one new feature; weapon mastery, and that didn't stick the landing how it should have.

A5E is far better revision of 5E.

 

[Retros_x]

Twin spell 1 sorcerery point. Command, hold person, hold monster, tashas, hideous laughter etc. Heighten spell as well.

Thats using one additional limited resource, so it should be better than regular casting. Plus it affect all spells, not just control, so weird phrasing here IMO.

 

[tetrasodium]

I am not sure if that is exactly where I would have the cut-off point, but I am fine with there being two books, makes it easier to ignore the higher one

I dunno. Having the divide at 0-8 for low level & the 9-20 for high is probably a great divide with good reasons for each end. If you set the split too high it just ends up as a basically unused curiosity like the old epic level handbook.

Starting with level zero & stopping just before tier3 on the low end should allow ample room to flesh out zero to someone memorable without making the low end feel like it should be skipped like 5e did with "survivors" (vrgtr?). Tho early levels are good for players establishing themselves in the world as part of it grown with roots linking them to NPCs organizations and so on. Conveniently it also avoids having PC's just teleporting in fully formed from Zeus's head without needing to lean into the dialed up lethality and seemingly useless starting gear seen in a lot of osr games that far exceeds what was present back in as&d2e∆ and such.


On the high end stopping 3 levels before tier3 by 3 levels allows for some room to smooth over early mistakes before stepping into high levels and provides some runway room to acclimate to any changes with any rules that no longer work at higher levels like rest expectations body slot/attunement changes or whatever while slowly feathering in the high level abilities rather than needing to do both at once or feel like the high levels can't change base rules that need rescaling for the increasing power level

∆nothing special about that edition vrs earlier ones just picked because I got it and whatever was in the red box about the same time and we used it more than redbox because flipping over to 3.5 at some point.

 

[Zardnaar]

Thats using one additional limited resource, so it should be better than regular casting. Plus it affect all spells, not just control, so weird phrasing here IMO.

Way twin spell is worded its mostly control spells.

 

[Horwath]

Way twin spell is worded its mostly control spells.

old twin spell was much better.
in 5.0 it was the ONLY thing that sorcerer could say to wizard, in this one thing, I am better than you.

should have just kept it at 1SP/spell level.
double that number of targets or area of a spell.
Nothing can be affected twice by the twin spell.
IE; fireball can create two areas to be affected, by if the overlap only one will target creatures in overlapping area.

or twin scorching ray.
3 rays become 6 rays, but max of 3 rays can target one creature.