WotC Seeks Unity with a New Edition

[Echohawk]

One minor thing: there was a book - I think it's called "Forgotten Realms Adventures" (or something like that, I have it but I can't find it right now to confirm) that came out in 1987 and was specifically intended and written as a transition from 1e to 2e. So I think 2e started oozing forth a bit earlier than your chart indicates.

Forgotten Realms Adventures was actually an April 1990 release, a year after the core 2nd Edition books!

The Forgotten Realms had a fairly gradual transition from 1st to 2nd edition -- at least as far as products go, not as far as the Time of Troubles went. The Shadowdale/Tantras/Waterdeep adventure and novel series were the main transition products, as well as Forgotten Realms Adventures which was half how-to-switch-editions, and half new setting material. The setting had to wait until July 1993 to get a completely updated Campaign Setting boxed set, four years into 2nd Edition!

 

[Anselyn]

I've been thinking about the essence of D&D comment. (...)

What does that account of? Likely levels, classes, and races along with the 6 ability scores. I also think they will probably build into it HP, AC, Saving Throws, move speeds, and a gold piece coinage system which can be used to buy equipment, arms, and armor (to begin with).

I suggest that this column:

​

​

​

​

​

​

"Minimalist D&D
Legends & Lore Archive | 7/5/2011
“A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when
there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to
take away.”​

— Antoine de Saint-Exupéry"

May mean that you strip back to ability scores and the essence of OD&D is roll some abilties, choose a class and start to play.

AC= DEX
HP = CON
WIS = "know roll" (c.f. BRP) for knowledge skills
INT = "idea roll" (c.f. BRP) for puzzling out traps and mechanisms
CHA = influence roll
....
(Not sure how to tie to hit rolls to STR - and you want a unified system of roll-under or roll-over. )

But at this level of boil-down every ability point counts and you don't need any table to refer to before you can start play.

BTW - is the d20 sacred? What do we think? One way to have a gritty/epic setting is to change the dice you roll.

d20 + ability vs target number
3d6 + ability vs target number
d10 + abilty vs target number

 

[talok55]

Yeah I have been seeing that too.

Really? You must search the forums a lot more than me. I have not seen one thread or heard of one instance of this. Not a single one.

 

[talok55]

Let's start the one thing, that mostly is needed to be on a fresh start.

Respect...

It not given.

It is earned.

I totally agree. WotC has a long way too go to earn back the trust and respect of gamers. What they have done recently is a start, but it's only a start. Let's see if they follow through.

 

[Umbran]

I'm not sure I'd completely agree. I do believe how the GM presents material matters a lot. However, I am also of the belief that mechanics (crunch) can (and often do) impact how fluff feels and how it comes across.

Yes, but look at what was asked for.

"Mystery". Mystery comes from two things: a lack of information, and some hope that you might gain some of that information. The game rules, then, cannot create mystery - if anything knowledge of the rules of any system removes some mystery from play. Only by stepping outside the realm of the rules known by the players can the GM hope to create mystery. And, of course, the rules cannot make the GM step outside the rules.

"A sense of agency and accomplishment". This is largely about whether player choices have a an noticeable effect, and thus lands in the realm of adventure and campaign design, not in the individual mechanics for task resolution. The game rules, for example, don't determine how much of a railroad any particular adventure is, or whether the player's choices within the adventure impact the game world outside the adventure in a meaningful way.

 

[howandwhy99]

In my experience, those have little or nothing to do with rules, and are mostly issues of how the GM presents material to the players.

Well, how the DM presents material is much of the rules. But I agree it isn't 3e or 4e mechanics that hinder mystery, agency, etc. It's a matter of presentation by the GM and one of perspective by the players. Detailing those, even as optional play, isn't a bad way to go if we're being inclusive and looking to move forward.

 

[Truth Seeker]

And they have a Longgggggggggggg way to go.

I totally agree. WotC has a long way too go to earn back the trust and respect of gamers. What they have done recently is a start, but it's only a start. Let's see if they follow through.

 

[gamerprinter]

Yes, but look at what was asked for.

"Mystery". Mystery comes from two things: a lack of information, and some hope that you might gain some of that information. The game rules, then, cannot create mystery - if anything knowledge of the rules of any system removes some mystery from play. Only by stepping outside the realm of the rules known by the players can the GM hope to create mystery. And, of course, the rules cannot make the GM step outside the rules.

"A sense of agency and accomplishment". This is largely about whether player choices have a an noticeable effect, and thus lands in the realm of adventure and campaign design, not in the individual mechanics for task resolution. The game rules, for example, don't determine how much of a railroad any particular adventure is, or whether the player's choices within the adventure impact the game world outside the adventure in a meaningful way.

I think this kind of thing is possibly accomplished within an adventure, or a campaign style rather than an aspect of the rules.

In my Kaidan trilogy for example, the PCs find themselves in a village right before an assault upon it, how they handle the situation, and if they save the village from destruction has many ramifications in the later adventures. NPCs of the countryside may offer aid to the PCs in their escape of the evil lord, but only if they successfully repulsed the assault in adventure 1.

This is accomplished in the story, not the rules.

 

[TerraDave]

3E&4E versus the retros:

Older editions can play faster (which, by itself, can be a huge advantage for some tables) and, for some people, the fact that less is spelled out opens up more room for improvisation.

Older editions (well, pre 2E and some of the 2E settings) also, and this is clearly a taste thing, still have the edge on style and presentation. There is just sort of a blandness to a lot of later stuff. And there are reasons why those early adventures are seen as classics that go beyond nostalgia. (though I have to admit, with 1000s to choose from, 3E/PF also has some pretty good adventures).

There are also other differences in details. Spell disruption and various damage immunities and reductions in many higher level creatures meant that casters were arguably more balanced compared to 3E, at least versus well equipped fighters.

 

[gamerprinter]

While it makes clerics weaker in the overall game, I've always preferred clerics with access and limited access to various 'spheres of influence' based on the portfolios of the gods worshipped, like it had been in 2e and prior. The fact that Thor the god of lightening provides the exact same spell access as a priest of Anubis, just doesn't make sense, thematically speaking. I'd rather differentiate clerics by the influence of their deities, providing specialtists like wizards, instead of all clerics being 'generalists'. And perhaps having granted powers (Su) and (Sp) more closely hewn to their gods influences and specific goals, in place of some of the loss of spell access.

I understand that this was changed in 3x to make clerics more playable and inviting to an adventure group. I think this diminishes cleric in flavor, despite enhancing them in power.

I don't expect this to change in 5e, but thought it was worth mentioning.