D&D 5E Monte Cook working on 5E?


First Post
Do you need the original 4E books to use the Essentials line?
No. The essentials books contain the rules, the same rules used for 4e play.
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?
Yes. I've seen pretty much every side of this. I've played PHB characters next to essentials characters, essentials characters next to PHB characters and Dmed for both at the same time, including during the campaign I keep PMing you notes about. It just isn't an issue, and my players aren't even aware of the divide. Hell, the most powerful characters in 4e are still those from the unerrataed PHB.

I've heard "No" to both these questions from 4E gamers enough to think Essentials is a full edition/revision/revamping.
I've heard 4e gamers freak out about a feat that gives +2 ac, while being okay with the Armor proficency(leather) feat, which effectively gives +2 AC, so I put zero stock in what I hear players freak out about.

log in or register to remove this ad


Mod Squad
Staff member
Why, you gonna sucker punch me at Gencon during an alcoholic rage or something?

If you want to continue posting, you need to treat your fellow posters with respect. If you cannot comport yourself like a mature adult, then you probably want to walk away from your keyboard.

I hope that's clear. If it isn't, take it to e-mail or PM with a moderator to discuss it.

Really? That's your best and most appropriate response?

By now, you should know our policies on public announcements about ignore lists, and how another person being rude first isn't a good excuse for much of anything. Next time, don't dignify nonsense with such a response, please.



I repredict the next version will be 2014 and will be called

D&D: The Full Monte.


First Post
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).
I do not view either 3.5 or Essentials to be a new edition - but I do view Essentials as 4.5, since like 3.5 the purpose was rebalancing and clarification. The fact that it was for an edition that I do not like does not change the purpose.

I think that the statement that there would be no 4.5 was silly. Not as silly as the old Star Fleet Battles method, but silly.... (This is from rules supplement! It supersedes your enhanced Klingon D7 from!)

I had no problem running 3.0 material with 3.5, and I doubt that folks have much trouble running Essentials with 4.0. So I consider neither to be a full edition.

The Auld Grump


One thing being ignored in all of these discussions is DDI.
If DDI is a success or even a significant revenuw source then Wizards cannot release a new version of D&D without having all its software ducks in a row.

What are the consequences of walking away from the DDI tools?

If DDI is irrelevant they could put out a new endition in 2013/14 but if DDI is important then the current DDI tools are not complete and once complete I would say they would need a couple of years to bring out the versions of the tools needed for the new edition.

They would also need to let the current tools on the market for some time as a market research tools also.
Remember as the DDI customers are creating charactera, monsters and even adventures on the tools WoTC will be able to mine the data to see what is being used.

It would be pretty foolish not to use that data in considering the shape of the next edition.

So say a year to complete the current tools and 2 watch use and develope new tools that puts us at 2014/15 for 5e.

Though given the rate at which software development occurs in WoTC 2015/16 might be more realistic.


First Post
Simply put: the sky is falling.

Basically, I think D&D-RPG is just too small for it to be worth Hasbro's while. And at the same time, the D&D IP is too valuable for them to consider selling it.

I do expect 5e to come out, but I also expect it to be fairly short-lived, regardless of actual quality. At the same time, I can see them continuing with video games, a new MMO or two, board games, perhaps a CCG, minis games, and movies.

Then we shall just have to move underground and continue gaming.

Crazy Jerome

First Post
My wild guess, with possibly only a virtue of being different than other guesses thus far:

We get a small interim set of products to revise interest, specifically designed to stretch out the launch of 5E until 2014, at the earliest. This is also designed to let DDI catch up with backlog of very much needed improvements before new demands are placed on it.

Hmm, Monte Cook really liked the 1E Unearthed Arcana. He liked it so much that he got permission to use a variation on the name and do a variant of 3E--which was different than the original, but close enough to be used in play alongside the original. Small innovations within a box. Not the first or last time he did that, either.

So we get several 4E Unearthed Arcana type products. Some of them will contain things like the 1E cavalier and the Arcana Unearthed Magister, which some gamers will love and others will hate. They will be irritatingly broken in certain circumstances, but so flavorful that people will take them and avoid the circumstances. They will mostly work with DDI, but you'll have to do a few things on paper to really make them shine. A lot of the stuff in these products will get toned down/refined/polished/refluffed for the later 5E version.


That would be the ultimate in irony.

I doubt you could do it with the GSL; that thing was written with the intent of giving WotC tight control.

However, 4E could very likely be OGL-ified. A lot of stuff would have to be renamed, and the rules text would have to be rewritten in the new designer's own words, but you can't copyright a game mechanic, and I think most of 4E's systems would be impossible to patent due to prior art. The same method used for retro-clones could just as easily create an... ante-clone?
Last edited:

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads