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

[AbdulAlhazred]

My interpretation of El Mahdi's posts is not that everyone should love 5e, but rather that if one has an interest in it, enough to post in 5e threads, and is not happy with how it's turning out, we have a unique opportunity to affect change. It's not like most other editions, where we have just a bit of preview, and then the game is out, for the most part complete and unchangeable. There's a process set up where we can give direct feedback and shape the course of future 5e design. There have been many a discussion about how 4e was financially unsuccessful. I have on the whole disagreed with that analysis, nor do I believe that the 4e fanbase makes up only a small part of the whole. I'm not putting WotC on a pedestal; I think it's entirely true that a lot of their design for 5e to date has been targeted at the non-4e fanbase, and I don't think they're doing it for nostalgia, or because they are stupid and love bad design. They're doing it because there is a significant market for it, and they want to make money. And so I expect them to listen to 4e fans, too, even if we have to wait a bit until they get around to putting in the things we want to see. If they put out a Warlord that only mitigates damage without healing, and it sucks and 4e fans are unhappy with it, I expect them to make some changes, because they want all the moneys, 4e fans moneys, too. But that only works if 4e fans are part of the process, filling out surveys, and giving feedback on specific game elements.

But I don't think anyone is obligated to participate, and if you don't want to, I also unreservedly support that, and hope that WotC maintains the 4e DDI tools for a long time. My beef is with the hyperbole, and with the idea that Next is unneeded, pointless, lacking in innovation, and just pandering to non-4e fans. And also the tendency to group all 4e fans (and any edition fans, really) as one homogeneous group that all like their preferred edition for the exact same reasons. As I said, it was a general thing, not directly specifically at you.

And @pemerton , let me explicitly exclude you from my complaints above. I may not always agree with you, but your contributions to the discussion have always been considerate, articulate, and full of meaty discussion, not potshots at the development team and hyperbole.

One aspect of DDN design that frustrates me a LOT is that I think most of what WotC and the community seem to think about issues with 4e is simply missing the point. People attack mechanical features of 4e that they somehow (understandably) think are negative points for them. Truthfully the way the game is presented, organized, and some of the details of material have more to do with it than the overall structure of the game, yet it is that structure, which is exactly what many of us appreciate about 4e, that has been attacked and deprecated.

AEDU power structures are not responsible for the details of how each 4e power is presented and what it does for instance. The tactical depth of the combat system is a construct that arises out of a lot of different details of various rules elements (IE there are many powers which require tracking and consideration of details like turn order, feats which often do the same, etc). If we went back and designed different powers with a different emphasis without changing any rules at all we can make a considerably different game with different tactical emphasis. Certainly changing some of the combat rules would allow even more to be done, but I don't think I've seen where many 4e advocates ever said that streamlined combat rules would be a bad thing.

The point is, I think the whole basis on which DDN is designed in contrast to 4e is ill-thought-out. Its a superficial analysis based on what people SAY vs going deeper and looking at what actually matters. Lest people react negatively to this assertion let them think carefully. How often do people really understand their own preferences? Do they know why they like certain food? Why they pick certain friends? Why would anyone think that in general people really understand the underlying reasons for picking a game? IMHO we COULD have a game that everyone in this thread would be satisfied with, but DDN can never be that game.

 

[Alan Shutko]

This seems to be something of an issue with you. Especially as you've said this many times, and tend to lead with it when describing your impression of 5E. Yet participating in a manner that can make it a game you would be interested in is out of the question.

That just doesn't make sense to me.

Well, it's been 9 months since the playtest started. Nobody really knows how much longer it will go. If it hasn't been fun to participate in the playtest so far, why should someone keep slogging through in the hopes that it will change at some point? I know Obryn and he's a pretty busy guy.

I haven't been involved in the playtest at all, and my reason is with a 2yo and another 3 month old son and having just moved, I don't have the time, even at the cost of missing the chance to provide input.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think this is 100% accurate and I'm not a 4e fan. I think it's a bit of a shame too, because I don't believe including those things would alienate the folks who left during 4e. Those it would alienate are likely not coming back to the Next game anyway. Their inclusion might help bring more of the 4e folks in.

Anyone who is going to refuse to participate in a game because it includes a race of fantasy creatures they don't like isn't welcome at my table anyway TBH. Nothing could be ruder than someone telling me that some part of the game that I like and want to use isn't allowed because somehow they can't stand to even hear about it. OTOH I don't think there are people here in this discussion that are of that ilk.

And let me clarify, if someone wants to not have DragonBorn (or halflings or whatever) in a game, that's great. Use what you want to use, play how you want to play. It is just the "Dragonborn is a deal breaker" nonsense that makes my eyes roll.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

This seems to be something of an issue with you. Especially as you've said this many times, and tend to lead with it when describing your impression of 5E. Yet participating in a manner that can make it a game you would be interested in is out of the question.

That just doesn't make sense to me.

But it is certainly your choice to make.

Yeah, I think you may not appreciate the degree to which every iteration of DDN has been a new and increasing disappointment. I started out with just outright puzzlement at the obvious lack of consideration that D&D would need to continue to evolve and should go forward from existing design instead of back, but it was early days we hadn't even seen anything beyond Mike and Monte brainstorming. It made us uneasy, they weren't talking a lingo that made sense to us, but we followed along and participated in the discussions and polls.

The reports and rumors came back from early playtests and our unease grew, but still nobody sensible would be too concerned. We waited, no doubt some of us must have participated in the closed playtest, but the rest of us wondered if there were really any advocates of our game even invited to that table.

We got the first playtest packet and more concrete information from Mike about what he was doing. Many things in the playtest packet were nice enough, and nothing was so horribly off that we couldn't imagine that it was early days and there would at least be options to get what we wanted. We heard promises of different ways to build PCs, different healing systems, etc.

Finally more specific pronouncements were made. There would be no alternatives to the magic system etc. At best "maybe we'll add some classes that work differently", and pacing would all be top down, the game would emphasize an AD&D-esque view of resources, healing would be limited to effectively an AD&D-like model, etc. NEVER, not even once, did we even get the promise of one single option that would support the type of play I favor. All the debates, all the appeals, all the filling out of playtest feedback and etc had absolutely no visible effect on the direction of the game whatsoever.

You talk about participating, but we did participate, and we left empty-handed. We held back judgment and our concerns fell on deaf ears. We pointed out what sorts of things we might like to see in the game. We got none of them, and we got L&L columns filled with explanations of how those things weren't part of the agenda at all, were not things that should be in D&D, etc.

Yeah, you can talk about participation and support, and enthusiasm, but clearly you haven't been on the other side of that. I realize you think that magically DDN can transform itself into what I would like at the last moment, but it just isn't realistic anymore. If I could sit down for 2 hours with Mike Mearls and explain what I want and talk about the game, it STILL WOULDN'T MATTER because he's flat out stated in no uncertain terms that a number of things that would have to be at least options aren't on the table at all. There is simply no reason on Earth whatsoever for me to be involved in DDN anymore. I follow it and I do play in some playtests because there are some fun players in one that I know, and I'll even spend the time to fill out surveys, it isn't a big deal, but I am far beyond any expectation that it matters at this point and I'm on to new and more interesting gaming experiences, and probably won't come back to WotC D&D.

 

[TwoSix]

The point is, I think the whole basis on which DDN is designed in contrast to 4e is ill-thought-out. Its a superficial analysis based on what people SAY vs going deeper and looking at what actually matters. Lest people react negatively to this assertion let them think carefully. How often do people really understand their own preferences? Do they know why they like certain food? Why they pick certain friends? Why would anyone think that in general people really understand the underlying reasons for picking a game? IMHO we COULD have a game that everyone in this thread would be satisfied with, but DDN can never be that game.

The other thing that bugs me is the missed opportunity to make 4e the base of a flexible, modular system that they're instead spending years to try and make D&DNext into. 4e starts with balanced math and support for metagame mechanics. It's trivial to take those out and replace them with other mechanics you like.

Want more vancian wizards? Replace encounter and utility powers with a spellbook and more daily powers. I mean, you get a new power level every odd level, just like the old Vancian wizard. Every level, you gain the ability to prepare 2 daily spells from your spell book of attack and utility powers.

Don't like healing surges? Get rid of them! Just go back to hit points!

Don't like martial daily powers? Use the Essential classes!

Too many feats? Roll them into class abilities!

Take all those kind of changes and put them into a new product called D&D Classic. The only consideration is that you want the output math to be roughly similar so that you can use 4e modules and monsters. Intra-party balance can be replaced with spotlight balance or pure simulation.

Make a few products like this (A boxed set with Fighting-Man, Elf, Hobbit, etc. classes. A 4e+ book with Elemental, Ki, and Shadow classes. A heroic tier product that emphasizes themes, as well as simple classes.), make them all tied into the DDI character builder, and I think everyone could have been happy.

 

[Obryn]

This seems to be something of an issue with you.
...
Perhaps you're reading more into my posts that what is actually there? Or some of the things I've posted have stirred up related emotions you already possess?

Only you can know where this assumption came from. I can't, and I honestly don't care to know. It's entirely your business.
...
Again, I think my posts may have triggered related emotions you already possessed, or perhaps my posts caused or elicited feelings of guilt you may have already been feeling? But whatever the impetus, I believe you've made assumptions about what I've posted based on those, rather than what I've actually been saying.

However, it seems that my replies to you are causing at least some frustration and irritation, so I'll leave you alone from here out (on this subject anyways).

Holy living crap, dude, could you armchair psychoanalyze me a little more, maybe? This is the most ridiculous and condescending post I've read on ENWorld in a while, and that's saying something. Your previous replies weren't "causing irritation," but this Dr. Phil parody sure the hell is.

Well, it's been 9 months since the playtest started. Nobody really knows how much longer it will go. If it hasn't been fun to participate in the playtest so far, why should someone keep slogging through in the hopes that it will change at some point? I know Obryn and he's a pretty busy guy.

I haven't been involved in the playtest at all, and my reason is with a 2yo and another 3 month old son and having just moved, I don't have the time, even at the cost of missing the chance to provide input.

Thanks. Yep; I see the benefits from my participation as being pretty minor compared with the opportunity costs involved with putting the time into Next as opposed to the actual games I'm playing right now.

-O

 

[TwoSix]

Holy living crap, dude, could you armchair psychoanalyze me a little more, maybe?

Show me on the doll where the bad role-playing game touched you.

 

[El Mahdi]

deleted

 

[El Mahdi]

deleted

 

[Mallus]

The first part? I'm not sure about. I think the warlord, like many other 4e idiosyncrasies such as dragonborn, are being held back because they are somewhat toxic to a portion of the fan base they need to court - folks who are not current WotC customers. I could be wrong about that - I hope I am - but so far that's what it looks like to me.

I hope you're wrong about that, too. If things called "dragonborn" are toxic in a game...

a) called Dungeons and Dragons

b) which has others things called "half-dragons" and

c) draconians and

d) saurials and

e) lizard-men and

f) whatever other reptilian humanoids I'm forgetting (let alone the rest of Chimerical Liberation Army)

... then you're talking about fanbase whose tastes are damn hard to figure out, let alone appeal to.