D&D 5E Will there be such a game as D&D Next?

[Bedrockgames]

In 4e, this is achieved via the minions monster type.

i know. I would keep the minion rules if I were making a cinematic D&D. Games like savage worlds do something quite similar

 

[Bedrockgames]

In 4e, this is achieved via the minions monster type.

In 4e, this is achieved via combination of healing surges - hit point reserves that require actions to unlock - and encounter and daily powers - output spikes that require attention to resource management to use effectively, and that straddle a whole range of output metrics: damage, conditions, buffs, moves, action economy advantages, etc.

That's the advantage of doing it via powers rather than just hero points: you can increase the sophistication of the range of options without having to perfectly balance every option across every other one, because the power system puts a natural brake on spamming. (Psionics is different in this respect, and is a known source of issues in 4e.)

In 4e, this is achived via minion, standard, elite and solo monster types.

Seriously, the version of D&D with "bennies" and "hero points" to support cinematic action has been designed and is currently on sale!

.).

4E may have had these things in it, like I said the minion rule is a good fit for cinematic. But to me cinematic requires fast and exciting play. 4E didn't give me that. My impression of 4E combat was much more of a tactical grind. For me I would shoot for much faster combats and less fiddly powers to make D&D cinematic. I would also want a much simpler game.

 

[Bedrockgames]

In 4e, this is achieved via the minions monster type.

In 4e, this is achieved via combination of healing surges - hit point reserves that require actions to unlock - and encounter and daily powers - output spikes that require attention to resource management to use effectively, and that straddle a whole range of output metrics: damage, conditions, buffs, moves, action economy advantages, etc.

That's the advantage of doing it via powers rather than just hero points: you can increase the sophistication of the range of options without having to perfectly balance every option across every other one, because the power system puts a natural brake on spamming. (Psionics is different in this respect, and is a known source of issues in 4e.)

i believe this works well for you but I read the explanation in the second paragraph and that sounds way too complicated for cinematic to me. I want simple and intense. Maybe it is just the way you phrased it though.

sensibilities too. For me, that's part of the cleverness of 4e's design, and something that would be lost if you just went to AD&D or 3E plus hero points.)
.

Just to be clear I would not propose Ad&D/3E plus bennies for a cinematic D&D module. I come from a savage worlds and cubicle 7 approach to this. I think the game would need to be stripped down and simplifies for cinematic to work. For me the measure would be can I run wuxia, raiders of the lost ark (albeit in a D&D setting) or 300 with this. More importantly does it feel like these movies when I am playing or just in hindsight (which is why I emphasize fast and simple).

 

[Bedrockgames]

, .

Seriously, the version of D&D with "bennies" and "hero points" to support cinematic action has been designed and is currently on sale!

" motif.

To be honest, if I were trying to cobble together a cinematic D&D module, there is a lot from 4E I would keep. Many of my complaints about 4E have with it not fitting my notion of default D&D. But I could certainly see some of those martial powers working well for cinematic. I may avoid the aedu structure but many of the individual powers would work quite well (I might take a cue from dragon age for example and tie daily powers to critical hits as an example). I would also simplify. 4E combat has too much of a 3E pace for my tastes here (which I find very slow for cinematic). I do realize not everyone shares the view that 4E combat is slow but for me, after playing mostly savage worlds, network and 2E, it is a bit on the slow side (which is fine, just not what I want for cinematic).

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I don't view the current state of affairs as neglect. Neglect implies that some obligation exists. WotC doesn't owe me anything. I don't owe WotC anything. What I see is a superficial analysis of what 4e players value. Presentation, design, and strong mechanics that fit together well are important to me. I don't expect or want a retread of 4e, but the impression I have is my fiction first priorities, expectancy of designing a game for the action at the table, and basing mechanics on strong mathematical analysis driven by a coherent design agenda are no longer priorities for WotC.

Oh well. I still have plenty of other games that suit my needs, and WotC might still prove me wrong. If they do they'll have my business. I also hope they continue to release more of the 4e catalog on DTRPG.

Yep! Exactly. The priorities that I would value in an edition of D&D are simply CLEARLY not WotC priorities. The fact that they are pretty basic attributes of an RPG and that DDN lacks ANY of these features, is a perfectly reasonable evidence of this difference in priorities. Like Campbell I don't expect or need a retread of 4e. What I would buy would be a game that had the same core agenda, was at least as much related to D&D flavor-wise as 4e is, and that was executed well-enough that it was at least as good a game as 4e and hopefully flat out improved on it. I might even play it if it was slightly LESS good in terms of my agenda if for instance everyone I play with would rather play it, or whatever.

While I will certainly grant El Madhi et al that it is not literally impossible that DDN could become that game, it would require at this time a wholesale restart of DDN development/radical restructuring of almost all elements of the game. Mike has already flat out stated that DDN is largely 'core complete' in terms of major design decisions. So I would have to further believe that some sort of large upset in the staff of WotC would be needed such that other people took Mike's place and changed plans drastically in order for DDN to change this much, or that Mike was just BSing us on that, which I seriously doubt, Mike shoots straight and knows his stuff too well to make stupid statements that are grossly inaccurate.

Ergo, DDN is VERY unlikely to meet my needs for a D&D edition. It is NOT just a matter of something that hasn't been addressed yet, or some module that needs to be added. The existing core parts of DDN will not produce the type of game I would like IMHO and don't match my needs. Its OK, like Campbell etc I have 4e and other games. In fact it is probably high time I got out there and ran some other FRPG for a while...

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I don't think WotC owes me anything as a 4E fan, but if the 'modular D&D for everybody' they keep advertising Next to be isn't going to include 4E, they should stop being evasive about it and fess up.

I think the gentlest way of interpreting things is that they're living in a world of hope because they have nothing else. In their hearts they know this, but they've staked their jobs and reputations and lots of work on it being possible, so they've convinced themselves that if they include "hit dice" and a few attack 'power' cantrips etc that magically this will do the job. You and I can see from the outside that this is not true. Mike & Co? They are no more off base than the 4e design team was when they assumed everyone would love their new game...

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

No it doesn't. By that logic, every other concept or issue not visited yet, such as the Bard, Gnomes, Paladins, Rangers, Druids, Warforged, etc., etc., etc., are evidence of neglecting them. And that's just not so.

Not getting to it yet is not neglect.

To quote old Inigo Montoya: I do not think that word means what you think it means.




It does include 4E. It may not include enough of what you want...yet...but it does include 4E. Just as it includes 3E, 2E, 1E, OD&D, etc., though doesn't include all of them either (just bits and pieces at this point).

There is no factual or logical basis present for such negative assumptions about 5E.

I think the reason this debate keeps going is that you're not appreciating what makes 4e desirable to many of us. It is stuff that is RIGHT AT THE CORE of the game. The way the skill system works, the way all classes use the same AEDU power system, etc. Sure, its possible that optional modules can provide some of those things, but they will be VERY DIFFERENT from the DDN core in at least some ways, and some things I don't think can be simply swapped in. I'm certainly going to look at DDN when it comes out and see, but all of my experience with game designs tells me that DDN will not ever do what 4e does in the way that makes 4e a preferred game to me. Once you understand that then you can understand our conversation.

Me: DDN doesn't support 4e style play
You: It will, just wait for those modules!
Me: DDN is fundamentally different from 4e, no module can make up that gap
You: It only includes bits and pieces right now
Me: DDN is structured in a way that won't work for 4e play and its core rules are established
You: Those are just negative assumptions.

I think you continue to believe that some '4e modules' can be grafted onto DDN core and make a game that plays like 4e. I cannot PROVE this won't or can't happen, but between what I know of game design (a fair amount), what WotC has said, and plain application of logic, I can and have IMHO demonstrated pretty conclusively that we're just not going in the right direction. The only hope is basically that I have little idea of what I want and when DDN is set in front of me I will have an epiphany and decide it is what I wanted all along. Yeah, that's possible too, lots of things are 'possible' at some level...

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Well i am not sure every encounter needs the kind of tension where pcs are brought back to the brink then overcome in the final moments every single encounter to be cinematic. Tat isnt my idea of cinematic. For me its about giving the gm the tools to scultp each encounter appropriate. I am doing a wuxia campaign now so will use that as an example.I want my wuxia campaign to follow the physics of a hong kong action movie. Let's say I have an adventure based loosely on come drink with me where the pcs are warriors or monks sent to investigate the kidnapping of a local noble. The noble has been kidnapped by a gang of bandits who have taken up in a local monestary because the head of the order is corrupt. If they go to the village and stay at the tavern the bandits are planning to attack them should the players make themselves known. I dont need the bandits to drop pcs, cut deep into their hp or anything like that. This is meant to feel like that first scene with cheng pei pei kicking butt. So these are all going to be one hp thugs with terrible ACs, to hit and damage. But if the pcs go to the temple, i want it to be a bgger challenge. So there will be one guy with a full amount of pc style hp, three or so half hp guys, and a bunch of 1 hp nobodies (obviously this stuff is very dependant on how the rest of the system works and how any hp pcs have, so these might not be the exact arrangement). This is just a vague notion. Without crunching numbers and running playtests with a full system i really cant answer your question very well. For me though, this wuld robably work just fine. The trick is setting the pc hp correctly and that would probably need a dial to accomodate different cinematic styles. For artial arts genres the pcs would definitely want to have a lot and be able to toss mooks aside like candy? I think burning through hp to do extra damage, avoid hits, get rerolls, etc would work well but again would need to run actual numbers and do playtest to get real info. For starting hp i would lean on having them start pretty good because for cinematic you can be a hero out of the gate. But i might make the full range tighter so the game isnt too dificult for the gm because the power spectrum is so large.

Well, I'm looking for encounters to produce some narrative movement. They will help develop and define a character, advance some element of the plot, and/or perhaps establish something (which could be facts, tone, etc). There will also be a flow of tension and 'story velocity', which are hard to pin down but are definitely pretty well-established concepts.

So, it is true that not every encounter must have the sort of 'go to the edge' type of tension that I talked about earlier the encounters that don't have such things are probably not there to be challenges at all, or have a secondary function of burning some PC resources as part of the setup (and tension/velocity management) for later serious challenges. In other words I might do things like have a group of low level thug lackeys in the tavern when the PCs get there who take a shot at them. These would be mooks, maybe some minions and a couple standard bad guys, say a full up level - 1 encounter. I'll set it up so that it goes quickly, give the players something to take their attention away as the thugs run off after a couple quick rounds of combat, maybe that will cause a bit of attrition, an HS or two, and the players will be sucked in, the ground is set. Now the players can be offered an info-gathering scene, etc. They'll find out what is going on, the town must be rescued and the bad guys rooted out of the monastery! This would go on, some encounters will be hard fights, when the HS type mechanics will be useful, and others might be trivial as combats, in which case it doesn't matter. The point is that the players will decide what scenes they are going to engage with, how much importance to put on them, etc. Often a lot of this is shaped by how the DM offers scenes, when he ups the ante, etc. For instance the DM might decide that things could be ramped up, it is a critical juncture, the PCs are about to learn the weakness of the bad guy. They show up at the maiden's house, but just as they are about to enter and learn what they need some thugs show up. The PCs lay on them, but then the bad guy's main henchman shows up! Do they engage him in a major battle now, or do they avoid this fight and carry out their plan? The DM has upped the ante! Either the team dukes it out with the bad guy or they run off and figure out some other plan, maybe using the fact that the henchman is in town to sneak up to the temple, etc.

Hero points can work here, and maybe they could be also hit points. The party can decide to burn some points and up the ante themselves against the evil henchman, big wire fu scene! They could also spend some points to decline, sneaking away before the bad guy sees them. They could just fight it out and hope they use less points that way than by upping the ante. They could turn the whole adventure into an attrition battle that way perhaps, though the DM will probably foil that. Like I said before though, the question is if there's going to be some way to add danger when the hit points are full at the start of the adventure. Given that hit points both absorb damage and serve as plot coupons it could create some problems like a weakened party can't up the ante, which isn't really conducive to good story telling. I don't know for sure, but I think I'd maybe rather have something like HS/AP to use for plot coupons that are at least one step removed from hit points. It seems like that would be more likely to evoke the "down but not out, we reached deep and..." thing. Still, I am no pro developer, I'm not at all sure how it would all come out.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Absolutely if HP and hero points are the same thing, the party has to use them wisely and engaging too many dangerous combats is going to make them less effective at a later time. For me this would be okay because I think I may be looking for something different from cinematic RPGs(though it is possible I am misreading you). For me I like having a cinematic feel to the physics but I am not necessarily looking for movie structure, story, etc. if you want scenes in the Laws or story game sense, and you them to have the flow and pace of a film, what I am proposing probably isn't going to suit your taste---I suppose I would see that more as a narrative module instead of a cinematic module but the terms are pretty subjective.

 

[El Mahdi]

deleted