Pathfinder and 4e's love child, what I want in 5e

[LightPhoenix]

(5) don't get too hung up on having a hard & fast rule for everything. The DM is supposed to be an impartial moderator, it's ok to trust his judgement for the inevitable gray areas that arise

There's a happy medium between free-form and rules-for-everything that represents a workable, codified set of rules that service the game without bogging it down. That's what any game should strive for.

I honestly don't think WOTC has a chance in hell of presenting a succesful 5e. 3e fans have Pathfinder. 4e fans have 4e. I think most AD&D fans have moved on and could care less what WOTC pushes out the door with the D&D logo on it. And the brand name is worth too much for Ha to sell it off. Whatever comes of 5e will do nothing but further splinter the market.

Only because people insist on being "fans," and not enough on having fun playing games. Sure, not everyone will love every game, that's a given. However, it seems to me that there are a fair number of people who are simply closed-minded, and using edition wars as a shield to hide it behind.

 

[Pentius]

Only because people insist on being "fans," and not enough on having fun playing games. Sure, not everyone will love every game, that's a given. However, it seems to me that there are a fair number of people who are simply closed-minded, and using edition wars as a shield to hide it behind.

Wait, Edition Warring is supposed to hide close-mindedness, now?

 

[wilrich]

The biggest plus in 4E to me as a DM was the fact that prep time is way, way easier in 4E than it was in 3.5E. Most of the bad guys at the end of my 3.5E campaign were powerful evil clerics - so, I had to pick out dozens of spells, feats, skills, equip them with magic items and regular equipment, decide on a prestige class and/or template, if needed, etc. And, since the campaign was against the followers of this evil deity, I also tried to make each bad guy a bit different than the previous one, just so they wouldn't feel like carbon copies.

THIS. To me this is the best, most important improvement in 4th edition. The ability to run even epic level monsters and have everything you need to do so in that monster's stat block is tremendous -- no need to look up or know what a dozen spells or feats do, just pull out the stat block, give it a once over, and off you go! Largely as a result, designing monsters, NPCs, foes, etc. is equally easy and quick.

In my mind the above are both (again) the single greatest innovation 4th edition brought and (for some reason) perhaps the most overlooked or least talked about. Strictly speaking from a DM's perspective, I don't think I could ever go back to 3.5 and any 5th edition love child would be 70% on the way of convincing me if it retained those features from 4th edition!

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

I suspect that "fast to prepare" and "lots of fiddly bits" are very much mutually exclusive.

Which is a pity; I like being able to make a lot of little decisions, but my DMs both really like not needing a bajillion spells that they can wind up missing in the heat of battle. One of them said, about every other session "...oh, that'd''ve been helpful to cast two rounds ago."

Brad

 

[NewJeffCT]

I suspect that "fast to prepare" and "lots of fiddly bits" are very much mutually exclusive.

Which is a pity; I like being able to make a lot of little decisions, but my DMs both really like not needing a bajillion spells that they can wind up missing in the heat of battle. One of them said, about every other session "...oh, that'd''ve been helpful to cast two rounds ago."

Brad

I agree with your DMs - when running 3.5E, my bad guys had so many items, feats, spells, powers, etc, that after combat, I would always be saying something similar to "That would have been helpful two rounds ago..." or, "$#!@#, I forgot her other magic ring (or class/template/PrC feature, etc"

 

[Pentius]

I suspect that "fast to prepare" and "lots of fiddly bits" are very much mutually exclusive.

Which is a pity; I like being able to make a lot of little decisions, but my DMs both really like not needing a bajillion spells that they can wind up missing in the heat of battle. One of them said, about every other session "...oh, that'd''ve been helpful to cast two rounds ago."

Brad

Perhaps a system that had varying levels of fiddly bits for different classes, with monsters that have only a couple bits apiece, self-contained stats blocks that fit on less than a page. That way the casual gamer could pick up the not-fiddly class, the fiddly-fan picks up his rather fiddly class, and the DM can run monsters without worrying too much about their fiddlies.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Perhaps a system that had varying levels of fiddly bits for different classes, with monsters that have only a couple bits apiece, self-contained stats blocks that fit on less than a page. That way the casual gamer could pick up the not-fiddly class, the fiddly-fan picks up his rather fiddly class, and the DM can run monsters without worrying too much about their fiddlies.

well, with 4E, you can add in fiddly bits with various magic items and their effects for the players, while also maintaining the ease of prep with monsters.

 

[Windjammer]

It's a bit hard to muster enthusiasm for 5E when all we got is two designers at its helm who are both past their prime and peak.

And if memory serves, no single designer in the whole history of D&D has ever delivered two convincing takes on it.

I'm more optimistic for 6E. Where I can sign up for the P500?

 

[Guest 85555]

It's a bit hard to muster enthusiasm for 5E when all we got is two designers at its helm who are both past their prime and peak.

And if memory serves, no single designer in the whole history of D&D has ever delivered two convincing takes on it.

I'm more optimistic for 6E. Where I can sign up for the P500?

I think it is fair to wonder if Monte can strike gold twice. The pressure alone has to be staggering. It is easy for designers to shout from the sidelines WOTC should do this or that for 5E, another to actually design the thing and please the D&D audience. However I don't know about "past their prime", I mean it isn't football or boxing. Sure I think all designers fall into a rut (especially once they get their own company and only have themselves as a critic), but this is exactly the kind of job that should re-ignite a designer's passions for the game. Even if 5E totally falls short or bombs I am very curious to see what Monte comes up with.

I think there is another thing at work here with Monte at the helm. There is a lot of good will out there for monte. I don't know why, but gamers seem to love him and always assume he is on their side of a given debate. I think this will work in their favor. It will soften some peoples' initial reaction to 5E.

All that said though, I think you are right to be skeptical given the reality of the brand. The market is fractured, and none of us know what design directions he has been given by Wizards. If they say, "make it like 1E for a post 3E world" he has to do that. If they say "make it 4E compatible, but make it appeal to Pathfinder fans" he has to do that as well. He could be getting some impossible goals. Even if he has total creative control, I am having trouble seeing how you bring together the people who like 4E and the people who like 3E. It seems that now that the divide is here, people know what they like. A new edition could just enfuriate the 4E fans, and only bring back a trickle of the 3E fans (who have pathfinder now).

 

[Aeolius]

A new edition could just enfuriate the 4E fans, and only bring back a trickle of the 3E fans (who have pathfinder now)

Actually, 3e fans still have 3e I started my current game in 2007 and did not want to end the game, as 4e suggested, to prepare for the new edition.