will 4.0 succeed?

[Ahnehnois]

13th Age was put together relatively cheaply.

I think if there is a clear design direction you could knock out a new edition of any form of D&D for a fraction of the time and cost required for WotC to do Next.

Agreed 100%. Money is required only to a certain threshold. As in most areas, I suspect that extra money is just wasted. In this day and age, engaging the online community is cheap, and disseminating information online is cheap. I think what really matters is whether the couple of people in the room making the big decisions have good ideas and communicate well.

 

[dd.stevenson]

Buggered if I know.

I gave my perspective on the issue but it's not the only perspective I have on the matter. Nor was it meant to represent the most common complaint. It was just a possible answer to the question you raise: it certainly wasn't an attempt at a definitive ex cathedra pronouncement.

Some were. Some weren't. There were big complaints from some people about the multiclassing and what they considered broken system mastery/multiclassing options. Enter PunPun.

Not so much on the forums, but there was a silent (aka...not really silent, but not anywhere close as vocal as the m/c haters) group that complained about the CR system and how they felt it was to confining and limiting, too dependant on characters following exactly the guidelines of equipment and other items...and how it was easily unbalanced one way or the other due to party configuration and equipment and ability choices.

DM's complained about prep time with many focusing on the monster rules and how they had to spend so much time because they designed every creature like they would a PC (personally, I didn't do this, but I suppose many DMs did).

Ironically, it wasn't just 4e that delved into this territory though from what I understand. From what I saw with how Paizo worked with PF, I think these same items popped up with their playtests and they also tackled these things (albeit with a different method) head on also.

Gotcha. I wasn't sure, but I thought your answers might have been saying that 4E included a significant push to appeal particularly to older edition players. If they had, then that would have been news to me.

Thanks for the replies.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

Gotcha. I wasn't sure, but I thought your answers might have been saying that 4E included a significant push to appeal particularly to older edition players. If they had, then that would have been news to me.

Thanks for the replies.

Definitely not.

But as someone who missed the easier prep of 1E during the latter 3.xE years I found 4E to be a revelation. And, to be frank, I find it much easier and faster to prepare than 1E or 2E. YMMV.

 

[Dungeoneer]

13th Age was put together relatively cheaply.

I think if there is a clear design direction you could knock out a new edition of any form of D&D for a fraction of the time and cost required for WotC to do Next.

THIS.

And this is what worries me about 5e. The time they're taking to develop it suggests they don't have a clear idea of what they're doing.

 

[billd91]

THIS.

And this is what worries me about 5e. The time they're taking to develop it suggests they don't have a clear idea of what they're doing.

Or, they realize they have a lot more at stake than the designers behind 13th Age have and want to make sure they take their best shot at it. Producing something new and unburdened by a legacy can be pretty liberating.

 

[Zardnaar]

THIS.

And this is what worries me about 5e. The time they're taking to develop it suggests they don't have a clear idea of what they're doing.

It is about the same amount of time as 2nd ed, 3rd and 4th ed took. 1987-89, 1998-2000, 2006-2008 or so. Gygax took 2 years to write the 1st ed DMG as well.

 

[dmccoy1693]

13th Age was put together relatively cheaply.

That's not what I see when I see the 13th Age book. I see, "DAMN! That art cost must have cost a ton!"

 

[Halivar]

Or, they realize they have a lot more at stake than the designers behind 13th Age have and want to make sure they take their best shot at it. Producing something new and unburdened by a legacy can be pretty liberating.

As well as unburdened by expectation. That being said, 13th Age is a damn good book, even if you never play it (like me; I just like to read it and mine it for ideas). It's the kind of jewel that really only comes around once in an era, and really by chance. I would not use it as a standard for how indie RPG's usually turn out.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm still trying to figure out what the appeal of 13th Age is. I've looked at it twice, and it just hasn't grabbed me.

 

[keterys]

I'm still trying to figure out what the appeal of 13th Age is. I've looked at it twice, and it just hasn't grabbed me.

It's probably not for you, and that's fine.

For me, 13th Age is the core of what I'd have expected from an actual 5th edition of D&D, that Next wasn't living up to. Something simple like the D&D I grew up on with some of the character customization from 3rd or 4th, but without most of the baggage of both.

In play, it runs very simple and sweet, which is definitely something for which I'm ready after 14 years of pushing the wargaming envelope the other direction.

That said, it definitely has some problems, and I'd tinker with it. Same with every D&D.

I also think they shot themselves in the foot a little bit by putting the Icon stuff up front (literally) and center, rather than easing into it.