Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9435513" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Hey, if anything positive can come out of the Prone Shooter debacle (note, it has since been errata'd to actually do something, so it isn't a completely wasted feat...just a mostly wasted feat), I'm all for it.But yeah, if you ever get the chance, check out a Shadowrun 5th edition book--core or otherwise. The editing mistakes can be...pretty egregious.That strongly depends on three key assumptions:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The future playerbase of D&D looks more like the playerbase that existed before 4e.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The creators don't learn any lessons from 4e, e.g. hard-wiring creative reinterpretation into the rules for things that aren't combat.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Whatever VTT is used is not considered an industry leader, something else is.</li> </ol>I don't think any of these assumptions are warranted. We can already see that there are major demographic shifts with the playerbase cultivated during 5e. A game actually designed for that new base, rather than being designed specifically (and almost exclusively) to court lapsed players will, necessarily, look VERY different, mechanically, thematically, and aesthetically. It also seems...pretty obvious to me that if they DO try to follow in 4e's footsteps, they will specifically target the known faults of 4e, from all sorts of angles--presentation is essential, thematics must be a core concern, people have some pretty big hangups about the precise kinds of mechanical diversity in classes, etc.--and attempt to address them. Finally, between D&D Beyond and its other stuff, it seems pretty damned likely to me that WotC will have a mature, effective, and (most importantly) already integrated VTT ready for folks to use, which would be a huge benefit for people. My current 5e DM (the indomitable Hussar) has had to wrestle with more than one mechanic to get Fantasy Grounds to work as desired; having all of the rules already implemented and tested officially would be a pretty nice perk for him, I'm sure.So...yeah. I'm not saying your argument is necessarily wrong; rather, for it to really hold water, you're relying on multiple assumptions that are anywhere between "up in the air" and "somewhat unlikely."</blockquote>

Verification