D&D 5E Monte Cook working on 5E?

[Nagol]

I'll go with Aug 18, 2012 (Saturday of Gencon).

 

[I'm A Banana]

Y'know, if they DON'T make an effort to recruit the older players, and they continue to disregard the OGL, it'll be interesting to see the game splinter, going in two different directions.

If they do either one of those things, it'll be interesting to see if D&D regains dominance, or if it's not enough for it.

If they do both of those things, I anticipate a strong Paizo third party showing.

Either way, I don't see the down side of a 5e.

 

[mhensley]

If they are indeed gearing up for the next "revision", I still think that 2014 would make a lot of sense, for the whole 40th anniversary thing...

I don't know why so many people give such importance to the 40th anniversary date. What did they publish to celebrate the 30th anniversary in 2004? A coffee table book that nobody liked? Yeah, I thought so.

 

[mhensley]

Things that make you go hmmmm....

Came out right before 4e-

Coming out on May 15, 2012-

 

[JRRNeiklot]

With everyone giving their guesses already, shouldn´t we create an official "When will 5E be released?" betting thread? So when it finally happens we can all check in that thread who was correct.

We had one of those years ago, and I had Gencon 2012. I still stand by that.

 

[Mistwell]

So, 3.0 = 5 years?, 3.5 = 5 years?, 4E - ?, 4Essentials = ? Somehow the math on this isn't making sense . . .



Dungeons & Dragons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


3.0 released in 2000 (beginning in August?), 3.5 released in June 2003, 4E in June 2008, and 4Essentials in November? of 2010, as near as I can tell. While we might see 5E (or whatever they call it) as early as 2012, I suspect June 2013 will be the target release (giving 3.XE an eight year run and 4.XE a five year run, or less). Anyone can see the cycle is shrinking considerably.

I don't view Essentials as a new edition, as it was fully backwards compatible with what came before. It's mostly just new classes and monsters. 3.5 was not backwards compatible, and ended about 80% of the 3rd party publishers. I view 3.5 as a much cleaner break in editions than 4e to Essentials. In fact, if it had not been called Essentials and just had yet more splat book names on the covers and a hardcover look and slightly altered formatting, I doubt anyone would have even bothered to make the argument to begin with.

So it went (IMO):

3.0 2000
3.5 2003 (3 years)
4.0 2008 (5 years)
5.0 2013 (5 years)

And that's with your estimate. Mine is it takes 2 years to create a new edition, and they just started, and d&d 40th anniversary is 2014. So I am guessing 2014 (6 years).

 

[Mark CMG]

I don't view Essentials as a new edition (. . .)

Do you need the original 4E books to use the Essentials line? If a game uses the Essentials line can someone show up with only the 4E PHB and be on equal footing with a table full of Essentials players and DM? I've heard "No" to both these questions from 4E gamers enough to think Essentials is a full edition/revision/revamping.

So, too, I know plenty of folks who utilize 3.5 material with their 3.0 games and vice versa.

Clearly they are either each their own editions or 3.X is commensurate with 4.X, meaning there is little difference between compatibility claims of 3.0/3.5 and compatibility claims of 4E/4Essentials.

Furthermore, if you count the number of folks who worked on 3.XE that continue to do so through Paizo and smaler publishers, then you really have to figure the clock hasn't run out on that edition anyway. Maybe some company will find a way to use the GSL to keep 4E/4Essentials alive when WotC stops producing material for it.

Things that make you go hmmmm....

Came out right before 4e-

Coming out on May 15, 2012-

Don't tell Mistwell.

 

[Mistwell]

Do you need the original 4E books to use the Essentials line?

No. Not sure that's a good measure of a new edition though. I knew dozens of people who didn't use the original 3e books to run their games, and they just used the SRD or even third party reproductions of the SRD (which, if I am not mistaken, you even published at one point).

If a game uses the Essentials line can someone show up with only the 4E PHB and be on equal footing with a table full of Essentials players and DM?

Absolutely they will be on equal footing. The debate rages over which is more or less powerful a set of classes, and the consensus seems to be that essentials has a more narrow focus, the core has a more broad focus, and they are roughly equal in power.

I've heard "No" to both these questions from 4E gamers enough to think Essentials is a full edition/revision/revamping.

You heard wrong on that second question. I don't think anyone can give you a firm definitive answer - which is why you'd have to cite to a consensus.

Don't tell Mistwell.

(uncalled for response edited out) ~ Plane Sailing, ENworld admin

 

[Mark CMG]

(. . .) which is why you'd have to cite to a consensus.

There's no real consensus.

(uncalled for response edited out) ~ Plane Sailing, ENworld admin

Really? That's your best and most appropriate response? I'll leave you to the moderators and just put you on my ignore list as I am sure others will after they report you.

 

[Nikosandros]

I don't know why so many people give such importance to the 40th anniversary date. What did they publish to celebrate the 30th anniversary in 2004? A coffee table book that nobody liked? Yeah, I thought so.

Yes, you're right. However, in 2004 3.5 had just been out for one year. Now, if a new edition (or revision) is going to come out in the next few years, having it coincide with the anniversary might make sense, especially since there has been a lot of talk from Wizards (especially Mike Mearls) about the legacy of D&D lately.