D&D 5E Should D&D 5E be GURPS D&D?

[Caster]

I started thinking about this after the 'One Core Book' thread popped up, and found myself REALLY liking it. The concept of having a solid, well designed, supported core set of rules that is the backbone of your brand. Be it set in Poland, Greyhawk, FR, whatevs. It's the default setting that embraces all the tropes the designers want to throw into D&D proper.

Then, using the core rules as your game engine, leverage the modularity concept and offer up alternate settings, all-edition rules expansions/supplements, guidelines, monster manuals, equipment manuals, what-have-you, etc, etc . . . Don't go too far afield from the tried and true variation on the medieval fantasy genre though.

All supported in-house, and, ALL optional. You just want to play core and ignore the rest? Done. The options NEVER overwrite the core if you don't want them to. Modularity also allows one group to play core as D&D Supers and other group to play D&D Gritty.

Hmmmm, sounds a little like the 2nd Ed of D&D to me now that I think of it but built on a re-vamped, simpler (as compared to AD&D) B/X, BECMI chassis.

What say you?

Dave

 

[rjfTrebor]

Well firstly, i do not want to carry around a 700 page rule book. secondly, as a dm, i wouldn't want the stats for all the monsters to be just a few page turns away for anyone who might get a little curious in the middle of a fight.
As a player, i don't want to pay 50$ or more for a book that i'll only be using 20$ of.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

A core set of rules, supplemented by options in other books is a good model. After that, any resemblance to GURPS should break down very rapidly.

I like GURPS, but it's take on options is way too fine-grained for D&D. Moreover, if they were going go that route, it would be as an extension to 3.5, not as a "unity edition."

 

[Caster]

Ok, sure, just to clarify, I'm not advocating the one-book core here. I just mentioned it because that's what got my D&DN as GURPS model idea going.

I'm fine with a 3/5/20 book core if need be. Well, maybe not 20. Although there is a polyhedral elegance to that idea.

Dave

 

[jadrax]

Personally, I would like to see Greyhawk as the assumed setting of the core books. Its worked pretty well in the past.

Then add separate guide books to other settings, written by their original designer where possible. Either include in these any require rules modules not included in the core books, or if there is a lot of them spin it off into an entire separate book.

That means most peoples core will be the three basic books, and one or two setting books, which I feel is acceptable.

You can then start working on the various optional splat books for people with more money that sense me.

 

[Serendipity]

Hmmmm, sounds a little like the 2nd Ed of D&D to me now that I think of it but built on a re-vamped, simpler (as compared to AD&D) B/X, BECMI chassis.

As you describe it here? Lovely idea. Especially the part I quoted. I don't think such a game would have to have the same page count as the two GURPS core books however. (I mean, it could, but as I envision it, such a book would be a bloated mess.)
I don't think that's likely what WotC is looking to put out however. Until they get closer to a release I doubt they'll say anything on this.

 

[Caster]

While I have no doubt that WOTC will keep the actual release format a secret until the last possible moment I very much hope that the Branding & Marketing people are working just as hard on 5E as the designers are.

IMHO WOTC totally screwed the pooch on 4th in regards to rolling out new material seemingly with no rhyme, reason, or cohesive strategy. Having no ACTUAL setting in the core was a mistake because it's very hard to release sourcebooks for an IMPLIED setting. Instead we got some planes books, some dragon/demon books, some treasure books, and too many POWERS/FEATS books.

This, as much as anything to do with the actual 4E approach to gaming D&D, helped turn it into a real non-starter.

I don't see WOTC following the Paizo/PF model of one core world, lots of adventure(s)/ Paths, etc. . . and making it work for them. Gut feeling only but PF has that model staked out pretty well by now. But I do see the GURPS model being an effective one for 5E.

Dave

 

[deadwor1d]

But I do see the GURPS model being an effective one for 5E.

Dave

I just hate GURPS.
But, I think you're right. My GURPS hate is system-related rather than a production model issue. I think SJG did a great job of pumping out new material for various settings, including licensed stuff. It's even tempted me to come play the game based on the various weird products they took a chance on.

 

[Thunderfoot]

While I have no doubt that WOTC will keep the actual release format a secret until the last possible moment I very much hope that the Branding & Marketing people are working just as hard on 5E as the designers are.

IMHO WOTC totally screwed the pooch on 4th in regards to rolling out new material seemingly with no rhyme, reason, or cohesive strategy. Having no ACTUAL setting in the core was a mistake because it's very hard to release sourcebooks for an IMPLIED setting. Instead we got some planes books, some dragon/demon books, some treasure books, and too many POWERS/FEATS books.

This, as much as anything to do with the actual 4E approach to gaming D&D, helped turn it into a real non-starter.

I don't see WOTC following the Paizo/PF model of one core world, lots of adventure(s)/ Paths, etc. . . and making it work for them. Gut feeling only but PF has that model staked out pretty well by now. But I do see the GURPS model being an effective one for 5E.

Dave

Talk about a total turn around from first edition. There was no implied setting. So much so that even the modules (which usually were set in Greyhawk) stated that the adventure is set in Greyhawk, but you as the DM can place this in a world of your own devising.

I would prefer to see a "world" neutral book (4e was NOT world neutral to me) with just base mechanics, no gods, no beliefs, no setting set dressing added, just light weight this is a basic set of rules, add setting as needed. Then if you want to release a setting book (Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Narnia, Iowa, whatever) then put the setting specific stuff in. It keeps the pages of the core manuals focused on the needed stuff (which means less core mechanic books needed) and allows the optional setting rules to be released as needed or desired (depending upon what marketing wants.)

 

[TarionzCousin]

Be it set in Poland, Greyhawk, FR, whatevs.

Basically, anywhere that doesn't actually exist, right?