|
There has been some talk about a major announcement from Wizards of the Coast. I checked EN World earlier, and found a link to Board Game Geek stating that the announcement will be the subject of a story in the New York Times:
[Major announcement coming from WotC
Morrus, the owner of EN World, did say that there will be a major piece of news from WotC at 10 Eastern -- and there is a countdown clock on the front of the site today
We will know the news in a few hours.
Probably something about the upcoming movie if it's making the mainstream press.
Cheers. I'm astonished that Playtesting a new edition would make the new York times.
|
Well, it looks like the people over at Wizards of the Coast, have decided to take a page out of Paizo's book with an open play test.
A new edition? well this will be interesting. I wonder if there will be those who look at their book shelves and howl about how much money they sunk into an edition, and now how all their books will be useless.
Well this could also be an opportunity and a chance to try and knit the community back together.
Well, it looks like the people over at Wizards of the Coast, have decided to take a page out of Paizo's book with an open play test.
A new edition? well this will be interesting. I wonder if there will be those who look at their book shelves and howl about how much money they sunk into an edition, and now how all their books will be useless.
Well this could also be an opportunity and a chance to try and knit the community back together.
I'm more worried about losing my character builder. :(
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Who cares. WotC's rude behavior to its "former-fans" is unforgivable. Its placement of greed over the interests of gamers is not forgotten.
I care! At least I am interested. And now having seen the news I am a very interested and will make effort to give my input into things (personally I like the idea of making D&D modular, so you can choose to have stuff like Attacks of Opportunity or not and the work is done for you to determine what else needs to be added to make that work.
... just be sure to spell 5e like this: .
Seriously? <where is my rolleyes smiley when I need it!>
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry. I've made my choice. I'll stick with the company that has always listened to and treated its fans with respect. 5E won't change that.
They see to be using the term "next iteration" rather than new edition. There's a brief comment on the wizards site which perhaps suggests they're hoping to transcend ones choice of edition. I can't even begin to think how one would do that. (though I may be misreading it).
|
|
I wonder if there will be those who look at their book shelves and howl about how much money they sunk into an edition, and now how all their books will be useless.
No doubt there will be.
And then there will be others who will have invested so much in a particular edition, be that Pathfinder or 4e, that they will stick with what they have and agree that a new edition doesn't make the old one useless (unless too many other players convert and won't play the game you stuck with).
And then there will be others who will want to try out the new edition and possibly sell their current edition stuff if they like it so much that they won't go back (at which point I am sure Ebay will be a good place to buy 4e and PF stuff).
|
|
Well I have signed up on the DnD Next community group and also signed up for notification of when material is available for playtest.
I made a comment that I hope they are not just asking for input on the rules but also how those rules are going to be delivered e.g. books, PDFs etc.
I wasn't interested in the PF playtest as it just seemed to be tweaking an existing ruleset - this however is much more exciting!
I am of mixed opinions on this. I have friends and players who are artists employed by WoTC for art in the books, and I like them getting paid; this being said, I was invested heavily in books in both 1st, 2nd, and 3rd edition (and 3.5 when it came out); I don't think that they released a hardcover I didn't buy, I loved (LOVED) it when they were prepping for 3rd ed from 2nd and they posted articles in every issue of Dragon about neat changings coming up and gave a nifty here's how to convert your character from 2nd to 3rd edition articles and booklet. In comes 4th ed where they say Hey Dragon, you know that magazine you started reading when you were just learning to play? Yeah that great magazine, it's gone. And Dungeon, yeah all the great Dungeon stuff? Gone. And coverting your current 3rd ed game to 4th? Can't. Have to start over.
It felt very much like a hate letter to old time gamers out there. I bought some 4th ed stuff (the basic 3 books) in hopes it'd be ok, but frankly it just didn't do it for me. For the one or two things I saw that I liked (minion monsters tends to jump out fully) there were pages of things that just rankled my skin and goth the "what the hell are they doing here?" treatment.
For 5th? Who knows maybe I'll pick up the basic books (assuming they make it books and not say random boosters you have to buy to get it all) and see how it feels, but I do have to say Pathfinder and Paizo have done an exemplary job in both listening to play testers, making things available for open world play testing, and writing great supliments.
I think the best thing to do is to give WotC a second chance. If they screw this one up, no more WotC.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am an enthusiastic DM of 4th edition. (I still have my bookshelves full of 1E/2E/3.0/3.5 stuff, and I continue to collect and run Paizo adventure paths using 4E.)
And as much as I LOVE 4E, I can tell you that I've been excited by many of the comments that have come out in the 4E Design and Development articles this past year, so I'm actually looking forward to seeing what happens with this new edition/iteration/whatever. WotC has been successfully recapturing the 1E feel in a lot of ways with the weekly Encounters program, and with many of their more recent releases.
Not everyone has to take change as a personal affront.
I'm more worried about losing my character builder. :(
I strongly agree with this. On the other hand, since using it requires a paid subscription, hopefully they won't see any need to remove the 4E character builder (or the "4E settings" if this is an "iteration") just because they've moved on to a new iteration/edition/whatever. At the very least, I'd like them to continue to support both for a year or two within DDI, to give us time to wrap up campaigns already in progress.
In retrospect it looks a lot like the Escapist article and Ryan Dancey's posts on ENWorld were meant to prepare the ground for this announcement.
I'm looking forward to this; I've rather liked the things Monte Cook has had to say in the L&L articles.
Ironically enough, I will be launching my first 4E campaign tomorrow night - running Gardmore Abbey - so as always I'm far behind the curve of trending games. =]
I signed up for 5E playtest info, though - hopefully, this will be a fun diversion for my group over the spring and summer this year.
|
It looks like Wotc may actually be capable of learning from it's mistakes. I guess 4E must have been a commercial failure if it is ending this soon. I guess that's what happens when you make a make a version of D&D that is not very D&D-like. Too bad, WotC may have learned from it's failures too late to save D&D. At least Pathfinder is doing well.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Hm, that article on WotC's site really seemed to play up a certain customizability...
"We want a game that rises above ... editions, one that takes the fundamental essence of D&D and brings it to the forefront of the game. In short, we want a game that is as simple or complex as you please, its action focused on combat, intrigue, and exploration as you desire. We want a game that is unmistakably D&D, but one that can easily become your D&D, the game that you want to run and play."
It almost makes it sound... modular.
Huh.I don't know if I'll ever be grabbing this one, to be honest. I've got Pathfinder(for when I ache with grognardia) and Legends(for when I am running a low-prep game[or one with really, really high-op players that love breaking systems]) for all my D&D needs, so unless this new edition is something really dazzling, I think I'll skip it.
Well, I've been running 4th ed pretty regularly for the past few years. I, like others here have gotten into the habit of converting PF Adventure paths (specifically CC.) Recently, my group and I had decided to switch over to Pathfinder completely. Our first game is set for a week from today. Anyway, I'll be sticking with Pf for the foreseeable future, but it's not going to stop me from trying out the 5th Ed. Playtest. Who knows, I might get lucky and be pleasantly surprised.
I can see it now...
"4e grognards."
The circle begins anew.
|
|
We need a "D&D 5th Edition" forum now, no need to harass the 4E players with the 5E discussions. Will there be any 4E players now? I'm not sure.
Can someone post the WoTC announcement here? I can't get to it.
Here is a link to the article
Charting the Course for D&D -- Your Choice, Your Game.
Here is some news threads from EN World
WotC Seeks Unity with a New Edition
Off to see the Wizards: The day that WotC showed me D&D 5th Edition
I will read the threads, think, and then post some thoughts here and at EN World.
" In short, we want a game that is as simple or complex as you please, its action focused on combat, intrigue, and exploration as you desire."
Cute and cuddly, but with lots of firepower! Funzo!
I guess I'm confused by all of this. Three years between additions, with even less time until the next one, (if the pattern continues)? Maybe I'm pessimistic, but I just don't see what possible advantage they could get out of this that would justify such a project.
|
|
It almost makes it sound... modular.
And that is what realy excites me about it!
Pathfinder can be a bit of a complex game and so when Paizo came up with the Beginner box they ditched a few rules, e.g. Attacks of Opportunity, I believe Favoured class bonuses etc.
However that then presents a problem of if you want to progress from the Beginner Box to the full RPG you need to read through a full book and learn to spot the differences, and if you want to take your character into level 6, you might need to find what wasn't included in the Beginner Box and retroactively add that stuff in.
With a modular set up there may not need to be a seperate beginner box product, the core game wouldn't have AoO etc, instead those could be options (along with the associated stuff like AoO related feats etc)that get added on if and when you want them. So if you want to keep playing after level 5 without AoO you can - something that wouldn't be so seamless moving from the Beginner Box to PF full.
If the battle map is also a module that you can simply bolt on as well, this could appeal to a much wider group of players. Maybe have simple abstract Zones ala FATE to start with and then have actual maps with specific distances etc be able to be added in if needed. If you can write adventures that can support both (e.g. have a map marked in 5 foot squares and also zones) then that could be great!
Players could even mix and match in the same game - have simple tavern brawn you don't expect to last beyond a couple of rounds - use the non-battle map rules. Later on have a climactic battle with the necromancer and his hoards on a bridge over flowing lava? Break out the battle map and minis!
This is all speculation, but a modular approach could really appeal to all groups of players IMHO, from those that like rules-lite games to those that like crunch.
"We want a game that is unmistakably D&D, but one that can easily become your D&D, the game that you want to run and play."So that was not the goal of 4E? Seems odd. So then what was the goal of 4E and did they accomplish it?
Did they want to make a sub-par game that drove vast numbers of loyal D&D players into the arms of a competing publisher that essentially reprinted the game they just decided needed to be replaced only to have to scrap and rewrite the new game 3 years later after a dismal launch and lackluster followup only to ask the very people they drove away to begin with for ideas on what they would like in another new game using an open playtest?
Because that seems like what 4E accomplished to me.
I think that's a touch harsh, I absolutely hate/hated 4th edition too, however they were probably screwed either way. If they kept the same rule system but tweaked it slightly, they would have been chastised for releasing DND 3.75 as a cash grab forcing players to buy yet another Players handbook, DMG and Monster Manual.
I think, they needed to come up with a brand new rules set that was unlike anything released, they chose one that was simple enough for people new to pen and paper to get onboard with. I think they probably imagined more of their fan base would have stuck with it and trust them on the edition (I bought my core books).
Sadly, many did not like the game and went elsewhere (here). That's the chance you take, I guess.
Not all ideas are great ones (Vanilla Coke).
I just hope Paizo doesn't feel pressured into coming out with a 2.0 edition, as IMO it ain't broke.
|
|
"We want a game that is unmistakably D&D, but one that can easily become your D&D, the game that you want to run and play."So that was not the goal of 4E? Seems odd. So then what was the goal of 4E and did they accomplish it?
Snark aside, actually 4e did not have that goal it seems, instead it had a very specific focus; to be a game about adventurers. However that didn't sit well with everyone as people wanted rules on how their characters could make a living as a blacksmith, how to make money churning out magic items, and how to win a baking competition.
With this new iteration of D&D I can see the core being about adventurers but then very clear modules able to be added on to support stuff like item creation, professions etc. So if you won't be calling for Bakery skill checks you're sorted but if you do you can bolt on a module and be sorted too.
That is what I got from the phrase "one that can easily become your D&D, the game that you want to run and play" - a game flexible enough to appeal to those who love all editions of D&D.
I hope they succeed, I really do.
A new edition? well this will be interesting. I wonder if there will be those who look at their book shelves and howl about how much money they sunk into an edition, and now how all their books will be useless.
There is at least one guy who looks at the 5 books on his bookshelf and thinks that three or four new ones would be a nice addition.
|
|
however they were probably screwed either way. If they kept the same rule system but tweaked it slightly, they would have been chastised for releasing DND 3.75 as a cash grab forcing players to buy yet another Players handbook, DMG and Monster Manual.
I completely agree, if WotC had released a 4e that was exactly what Paizo released with Pathfinder I am sure many people would have cursed WotC for trying to con their customers into buying a new version of the same old books by just tweaking a few things.
And its the same damned if you do, damned if you don't that WotC is facing now - 4e haters have spat venom at WotC about how crap 4e is, and now WotC are trying to improve things and get player input those same people seem to be calling out WotC for making a cash grab by bringing out an edition so soon after 4e.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my personal opinion, it's too little too late. The game system they put together for 4th edition was overly simplistic and overpowering, built to make the power gamers drool at the opportunity to play the game.
Also, keep in mind that most publishers can't wait to get to release a new edition of a game (even if one isn't required at a time). Most people playing D&D really only needed the PHB, DMG, and MM. Any other book beyond the first three were completely optional and were purchased if they actually saw a use for it in their game. But, if a new edition is released, you're guaranteed that every single player in your hobby will have to purchase three new books in order to stay up to date with the current rules for the game. So, releasing new editions can be financially convenient for a games publisher just to squeeze a couple extra dollars out of their players.
At the end of the day, I've made my peace with WotC, but they will never see me buy another D&D product from them in the future. Pathfinder has a strong (if not likely, STRONGER) gamer following than D&D has. The truth can be seen in sales numbers in stores, number of games played at conventions, and in the sheer number of awards Paizo has received over WotC (who traditionally dominated in gaming awards). I'm fully behind the Pathfinder product now, and am completely happy with where they have taken the hobby.
Tarrintino
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
For some reason, this whole thing just makes me sad. Yes, I'm a Paizo/Pathfinder bobo, and yes, I loathe Hasbro and it's soulless culture. It's also true that I don't find 4e my cup of tea, whereas Pathfinder is. But I don't hate 4e players and I didn't want the edition to fail. 4e players had their game they loved and enthusiastically supported, and Pathfinder players had their game that they loved and enthusiastically supported. Both groups could be happy that they had a game that they enjoyed. Where was the harm in that?
The harm, of course, was to Hasbro's bottom line. They demand a "unified game," and why? So that, like back in the heyday of the game, the vast majority of the RPG money gets channeled into one coffer. Unfortunately for them, those days are dead and gone and Hasbro is chasing a chimera. For better or worse, the market is splintered. Nobody's going to make all the money, because people have discovered the joy of having the game they want, rather than the game they're told to want. So Hasbro will make its fans shell out more hundreds of dollars just to be able to play the latest products, and other groups will continue to go their own ways because they already have games they enjoy. It's just so cynical and crass and depressing.
Death to Hasbro. Long live D&D, in whatever name, iteration, or flavor you choose!
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe that 5E will be a great game just like 4E was.
I am sure that my business with WotC is over. Their mishandling of 4E on oh some many levels eroded my sympathy to the company, and somebody was kind enough to supply me with an alternative of premium quality.
The only thing that interests me in 5E is the question if the new game can break even in face of all that was lost during the 4E days, or are there perhaps enough disgruntled people who lost their faith in WotC so that 5E won't be able to claw back on the top.