D&D 5E "The next iteration of D&D is a game on its own"

[TerraDave]

The next iteration of D&D is a game on its own. However, what we’ll do is look at the best parts of prior editions and create either new rules or adapt existing rules to incorporate those things into the game. That’s also a big part of the open playtest, ensuring that the fans of each edition are getting what they see as the most important elements of their editions of choice.

from here

What Is The Next Dungeons & Dragons? - Features - www.GameInformer.com

This has been touched on in many of the threads here, but I think now they have come out and said it. This isn't about bringing back THACO or non-weapon proficiencies or a particular set of psionics rules (or healing surges? or skill ranks? or the warden?), but is about learning from various editions and catering to their fans.

...discuss...

 

[foolish_mortals]

so what their saying is that it's going to be another confusing jump like 3 to 4 was? And people from different editions with recognize piece of their favorites in it?

arrghh...
foolish_mortals

 

[Jack7]

I think he is drawing the distinction, in the first sentence, of saying "5E will not just be an amalgam, but will rather have it's own framework, of which part will consist of what they think are the best elements of the previous editions."

That's how I read it anyways.

 

[WheresMyD20]

It sounds like a nice way of stating that 5e won't be an evolution of 4e. It's going to be a total engine rebuild.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Like I said in the last topic on their statements, I see more confirmation that neither 3E nor 4E will be the starting point.

 

[Raith5]

The link goes to page 2, rather than page 1 of the article. On that page Mearls says:

"One of our mantras is to let the DM and players decide on the focus. This is where the idea of a strong foundation and flexible rules that can be layered upon comes in. It isn’t the job of the D&D rules to tell you how to run your campaign. The rules are tools that you use to create the campaign you want. That’s a big part of our design philosophy".

It is hard to disagree with that philosophy!

 

[SKyOdin]

I think that this was going to have to be the case. I for one strongly dislike some of the fundamental concepts of 3E's mechanics, which is why I could never get into Pathfinder. At the same time, there are quite a few people who have a deep-seated dislike for Fourth Edition's basic tenets, some of which I agree with even as a fan of 4E. The basic core mechanics of both games are flawed, and these flaws are well known. Reconciling different play-styles and game preferences will require a whole new approach and core system.

 

[trancejeremy]

Hmmm, this is probably the best description of the new edition.

What Is The Next Dungeons & Dragons? - Features - www.GameInformer.com

We want to create a shared foundation that people can build upon, so it’s really about creating a slim, easy to use set of rules. From there, there are two basic paths.

Players can pick their own style and complexity within a class. Think of it kind of like having a $10 budget to spend on lunch. Some people will go to a restaurant and buy a $10 lunch special. Someone else might spend that $10 by ordering a few different things off the menu, rather than a special. Someone else might take that $10 and go to the grocery store to buy all the ingredients for a recipe they like. The idea is to put everyone on the same scale, but then allow people to burrow into the level of detail they want.

DMs have a similar process they can go through, adding optional rules to flesh out their campaigns. Those options can range from creating a unique list of races or classes for a setting, to adding in special rules for things like managing a kingdom or waging a war.

 

[Dire Bare]

so what their saying is that it's going to be another confusing jump like 3 to 4 was? And people from different editions with recognize piece of their favorites in it?

arrghh...
foolish_mortals

Yeah, that's what Mearls said. Not.

 

[pemerton]

This has been touched on in many of the threads here, but I think now they have come out and said it. This isn't about bringing back THACO or non-weapon proficiencies or a particular set of psionics rules (or healing surges? or skill ranks? or the warden?), but is about learning from various editions and catering to their fans.

I hadn't realised that this was ever in doubt!

 

[foolish_mortals]

I hope the flumphs who have the time to help them playtest/write the new dnd game can come here and post about their experiences. I hate reading these dorky statements from these game building toads like money cookie that don't really tell me anything. Better to hear what the players are saying, free of the marketing blabber.

long live the game flumphs!
foolish_mortals

Mod: This type of comment, and the pattern of behavior exhibited by this poster, is unacceptable here at ENWorld and moderation has occurred. Note that foolish_mortals can no longer post in this thread, so please do not respond or report any more of his posts in it. -Keterys

 

[TerraDave]

I hadn't realised that this was ever in doubt!

Things seem obvious...until they are not.

They have made a lot of bold statements, and some people have high expectations. But to be a functional game, they will have to make some choices.

I guess that is where the play-test comes in.

 

[mkill]

I hate reading these dorky statements from these game building toads like money cookie

I have my own beef with Monte Cook, but at least I have the decency to call him by his name. And lets face it, he has achieved more in game design than you ever will (or I, for that matter). Even if you disagree with some of his design decisions, there is no need for that level of disrespect.

With all due respect, please shut up. I'll look up the ignore function of this forum now, which is a first time for me. If you consider this an achievement, you are welcome.

 

[Number48]

What I think and hope they are going to do is take the 80% of what is great in the concept (not necessarily the mechanics) of 3E, plus the 80% of what is great in the concept of 4E plus another 40% of new stuff that is great and give a game running at 200%.

 

[Jack99]

Sounds less and less as if the base will be 3e or 4e. Rather, it will be a very simplified version of 1e, and then you have all the options that you can add to that simplified base, thus creating a character closer to 3e or even 4e, if that is what you want.

 

[Number48]

Sounds less and less as if the base will be 3e or 4e. Rather, it will be a very simplified version of 1e, and then you have all the options that you can add to that simplified base, thus creating a character closer to 3e or even 4e, if that is what you want.

I disagree. What you describe would be very hard for moving an already-created character from one campaign to another. I don't think that is what they promised. I think it is, or at least should be, that we use this system as our model for combat, this system as our model for noncombat, this system as our model for worldbuilding and in the fiddly parts of character creation we have a simplicity dial that doesn't change what the fiddly bit might do but just how much choice and thus fiddling you exercise in using it.

 

[TerraDave]

...moving an already-created character from one campaign to another. ....

This is were the quote become relevant. It will be a new game, and the character will have to be converted, at least to some extent.

It may be easy to do, or not. But I don't think you will be able to take your AD&D char sheet and just use as is.

 

[Number48]

This is were the quote become relevant. It will be a new game, and the character will have to be converted, at least to some extent.

It may be easy to do, or not. But I don't think you will be able to take your AD&D char sheet and just use as is.

You misunderstand what I meant. I mean, in from Jack99's statement of how he sees 5E I think it sounds hard to use the same character in 2 different 5E games. That is what is promised is that I can use the same character in both my buddies 5E games that have different option sets and have to do little to no fiddling with the character to make that happen.

 

[TerraDave]

[MENTION=6688047]Number48[/MENTION] Ahh. I did misunderstand indeed.

I am...guessing...they have a way of balancing choices on the player side. So you can then carry your character around in that sense. Now, some things the DM might still not allow (psionics, or divine characters in a Dark Sun game).

Other, rules type stuff, remains with the DM. So the core game has simple healing, no attacks of opportunity...and these then may very across games depending on the DM.

But yes, there will be grey areas. You build a character to use a maneuver system not allowed...is that like psionics (and a no), does the DM make an exception for you...it will be an issue.

 

[Aegir]

The whole bit about $10 for lunch and everyone chooses something different makes it sound like there will be a toolbox of various rules additions (for example start with a core of 1e, and a toolbox that contains things like 2e weapon/non-weapon profs, 3e skills, 3e feats, 4e powers, etc), and each has a point cost, and you are granted X amount of points with which to buy in to various aspects of character customization.

That could be totally off, but its what comes to mind from that quote.