Which D&D "sacred cows" will be sacrificed in 5E?

[Stalker0]

+X swords may finally go, to be replaced with magic items that just have various properties and the like.

I think you could make a case to see stats stripped more and more away from actual game mechanics to the point where they aren't necessary. Don't think they will lose the stats, but they may have less impact on your character than in previous editions.

 

[EATherrian]

Classes, levels, armor class, hit points, d20 to hit, dungeons, dragons, spells, magic items, combat and gold pieces.

They will keep otyughs though. The game will be a round-table discussion. The players all play noted otyugh philosophers, scientists, pundits, cultural commentators, orientalists and peril experts debating issues of the day on live TV. And you'll be able to phone in to vote off your least favourite otyugh.

I'm all for it if just we can bring back the arcane encumbrance rules from 1E!

 

[Kaodi]

I am hoping that next-edition speculation will be the first to go.

 

[Lanefan]

I suspect even more randomness will disappear.

Depending on where technology is in a few years, I'm almost ready to suggest the very idea of the in-person tabletop game will - if not disappear - be relegated to no more than an option, with the primary game being via a virtual tabletop and, of course, subscription-based. I'd not be at all surprised if the virtual game had elements and rules that were only accessible that way, and not included in the printed version - as in "We'll sell you this in-print introductory game for cheap, and it's quite playable; but if you want to play the *real* game you'll have to go online, and subscribe..."

I wouldn't be surprised to see even more streamlining of weapon and armour types - armour, for example, might be reduced to merely a "none-light-medium-heavy" division (thus only 4 armour variants) with actual type left merely as flavour. So, no more leather vs. studded vs. ring mail - it's all just "light".

4e's dailies will go; as the last remaining vestige of Vancian-style resource management, they don't have a chance.

Worldbuilding might get thrown under the bus, to be replaced with adventure-path campaigns. No more sandboxes, at least not in core design.

And, for the record and if anyone cares, I stand opposed to all of these changes. I merely point out that these cows are probably lining up right now for the abbotoir, whether I want them to or not.

Lan-"if it's light armour, why doesn't it help me see in the dark?"-efan

 

[xechnao]

- armour, for example, might be reduced to merely a "none-light-medium-heavy" division (thus only 4 armour variants) with actual type left merely as flavour. So, no more leather vs. studded vs. ring mail - it's all just "light".

I really like this- but I doubt Wotc will simplify things that much. Cause it loses a way to sell things. OTOH I have recently seen on some video game interview a video game whose engine create all these "items" by itself on the go. Random-item-generator or something like that. At that point it becomes futile trying to play the mini-game of collecting the best armor suit or what have you and the fun is all about what you get each time you stumble upon some new piece of equipment and trying it out. As for myself, it always annoyed me having to figure out what is the best armour suit or something like that. My buddies do not care at all and it honestly adds nothing to the game while we are playing -just substructs us instead.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I would say alignment would be something to go, perhaps getting only mentioned as a optional thing.

 

[Klaus]

I wouldn't be surprised if they're already working on a 5E D&D.

As a historical precedent, work on 4E was already underway in early 2005 which was a bit over a year after 3.5E was released.

I would imagine they would want a 5E product ready, if it turns out the 4E "well" runs dry earlier than they anticipated.

Do note that thanks to the DDi, D&D now has a steady revenue that is independent of new core books. The DDi, IMHO, reduces the "must release updated core books" drive, and makes the edition cycle much longer than it has been in the past.

 

[FriarRosing]

I've heard a lot about the game turning into an online table-top thing, but I just find that so unlikely. As much as people love technology, I think people like to interact with people face to face, and to touch real, tangible objects to play a game with. And especially with a game like D&D, where it's all about imagining things and atmosphere.

I could of course be wrong.

 

[ggroy]

I would say alignment would be something to go, perhaps getting only mentioned as a optional thing.

I remember back in the 1E AD&D days, some DM's I knew paid close attention to how players played their characters according to alignment.

As the years went by, many DMs of the games I played in, paid less and less attention to alignment along the lawful-chaotic axis. Though they still did pay attention to the good-evil axis.

These days, I don't really pay much attention to alignment other than if a player is deliberately being disruptive to the game and using their character's alignment as an excuse for being personally stupid.

 

[Minirogue]

I imagine either 5e will go backwards a little bit to appease the pre-4e players, or it will become something like this:

The Complete Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition Player's Handbook

 

[outsider]

I doubt they'll kill many at all. They didn't hesitate very much to get rid of what they didn't like with 4e. The only ones I think will go are the ones that 4e merely gives lip service to. For example, the option for rolling for attributes. Have you taken a look at that rule recently? The 4e implementation makes it clear that random attributes really don't belong. So, that'll be gone. I suspect if you really want to know what sacred cows will be gone in the next edition, you should look for stuff like that. There's probably several more examples of stuff they really didn't want to include, but did out of tradition.

 

[ggroy]

There's probably several more examples of stuff they really didn't want to include, but did out of tradition.

What would be specific examples of this, besides the rolling for attributes?

 

[Minirogue]

I would say alignment would be something to go, perhaps getting only mentioned as a optional thing.

Hmm...I kinda thought it was pretty much optional for 4e anyways...at least that's how it's treated

 

[outsider]

I don't have any other examples off the top of my head. That's the one that really jumped out at me when I originally read the PHB, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's a couple more(though not many, as they definitely weren't afraid to slaughter sacred cows in this edition). I'll pull out my phb and read a bit, see if I can come up with any others.

 

[TwinBahamut]

I think +x items will probably go. We may still see tiered equipment, similar to the way 4E treats masterwork armor (I don't want to see even that, but it might exist), but I really do think that +x benefits need to go for significant game design reasons. If nothing else, they just limit certain class concepts (anything that doesn't use a weapon has to jump through hoops) and force the need to constantly upgrade items along a predetermined track, allowing the possibility of getting ahead of that track or falling behind it. Limiting stat-boosting items in 4E opened up the magic item system a lot compared to 3E, and removing +x items would help just as much if not more.

While I don't quite expect it, I wouldn't mind seeing the Fighter class, as in a single class that is designed to embody as many combat styles and archetypes as possible, get diminished even further. It should get broken apart into several different classes the same way the Wizard was broken up in 4E.

Honestly, I would really like to see them break down the "Dungeons and Dragons is an exclusively fantasy genre game" barrier, so that fantasy, modern, and futuristic settings and concepts could all be melded together seamlessly.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Honestly, I would really like to see them break down the "Dungeons and Dragons is an exclusively fantasy genre game" barrier, so that fantasy, modern, and futuristic settings and concepts could all be melded together seamlessly.

I don't see it happening. But that would be great. Or even just breaking out beyond just traditional high-fantasy and having many different types built into core. To be able to pull off a game like Perdido Street Station from just core D&D be awesome.

 

[Jan van Leyden]

Depending on where technology is in a few years, I'm almost ready to suggest the very idea of the in-person tabletop game will - if not disappear - be relegated to no more than an option, with the primary game being via a virtual tabletop and, of course, subscription-based. I'd not be at all surprised if the virtual game had elements and rules that were only accessible that way, and not included in the printed version - as in "We'll sell you this in-print introductory game for cheap, and it's quite playable; but if you want to play the *real* game you'll have to go online, and subscribe..."

This. WotC will move away from being a publishing company to performing as a service company. They'll probably sell you some infrastructure (core books with information on the real mechanisms but without game data [classes, races, powers], plus perhaps guide books to world buiolding and adventure writing) and provide you more stuff (character management, adventures, game data) in form of a rented service. A free demo version will give you access to a subset of the game data. You'll be able to make personalized printouts of the game data (character folio with all specific rules pertaining to this character, printed version of your aself-made adventure), if you insist on playing on your dinner table instead of in front of your screen.

Oh, and Paizo will release a completely revamped Pathfinder 2.0 which looks remarkably like D&D 4E.

 

[Plane Sailing]

As Piratecat says here http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/258492-how-many-pages-will-5e-phb-have.html, lets ditch the "5e" threads for a while, please.