Just because I am rude and I want to be first. It is currently 8:39 EST and WotC is about to announce a new version of D&D. Give or take 2 hours from now. Am I psychic?
Printable View
Just because I am rude and I want to be first. It is currently 8:39 EST and WotC is about to announce a new version of D&D. Give or take 2 hours from now. Am I psychic?
Looks like I am not the only psychic in the world today https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/10/a...ers-input.html
No surprise there. As soon as Book of Vile Darkness gets put out, a new edition is on it's way. LOL
Here it is, the announcement:
https://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article....d/4ll/20120109
Does it need another edition?
Not played D&D since 2nd so I would not know
What I mean is 3rd edition and 4th edition just seemed to split people over which version to play I would have thought the last thing they should do is shatter it further?
Hmm. Not sure how I feel about this.
I have been a loyal D&D fan since the very beginning however this is beginning to grate on my nerves a bit. It seems we are destined to have a revised edition every few years. Only seems like yesterday 4E was announced.
I have to say, it will take a lot to convince me to re-invest in 5E, the content quality and control of data revisions will have to be addressed before I spend any more time and money on WotC products. Having said that I would like to see a return to RPG rather than another iteration further towards a miniatures based battle game. If thats the case, I maybe more willing to consider the move.
I also hope they get the digital strategy right this time and are more open to allowing 3rd parties to support 5E. Smiteworks for one. ;)
I thought *exactly* the same thing. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by kalmarjan
This is a good question. I believe that 4E fragmented the D&D market. It is my believe/speculation that 5E is *suppose* to unfragment the market. I personally think it is real rough to put Humpty Dumpty back together.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doswelk
I think they will basically do a core rules - roll a d20 and you want high, roll other dice and you want high also - and then do a bunch of optional rules similar to the old Unearth Arcana to hang off the core so you can have either something that is close to 4E or 3.x. Basically mix and matching the features you want in your campaign game.
I cannot see how the pathfinder/3.5e fans and the 4e fans can be appeased, the whole game design was markedly different.
I was still playing Savage Worlds when 4e came out I got the books read it and thought there's nothing here to make me want to play D&D again.
It will be interesting to see how they try to repair things.
Yeah, a level 1-20 v3.5 campaign send me scurrying for Savage (or something to bring the pace and fun back into the game). Loved low-level 3.5e, but as soon as multi-attack, full-round actions came in, it became much less fun. Oh, and the whole multi-class prestige thing led to PCs becoming an irritating grab bag of misc. powers.
I understand that 4E was supposed to overcome that issue (and the issue of too many +2 / -2 modifiers - although Fantasy Grounds conquered that issue for me somewhat too) but made the game a lot more wargame / MMO like with the "1/day powers" and special combat manoeuvres (disclaimer : I have no idea what I'm talking about here)
I also understand people sticking with 2E - I loved that game, and despite the limitations of class levelling (once a mage, always a mage) don't recall that being a huge drag. In fact I understand a lot of 2E die-hards have stuck with it or gone onto games that embody it's spirit, such as C&C or Labyrinth Lord (disclaimer : I still no idea what I'm talking about)
I can't help but think "5E" is going to fragment the D&D crowd further, which works well for me, as I can try and convert more players to my systems - SW and Runequest often being my poison's of choice these days.
But the idea that 5E might somehow "bring the people together" reminds me of this gem from XKCD :
https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png
In my opinion WotC clearly hasn't thought things through. First if *I* can leak the information before they have made the announcement they clearly have no control over their employees.
Next you run into the issue that yes 4th ed. fractured the gaming world. It is very difficult to find a new group of players for a game anymore. You add in yet another ruleset and you could destroy the already fragile fantasy tabletop world.
Finally you get into the issue of the greed machine and how soon is now?
At the rate they are going might as well announce 6th and 7th edition as well, and tell everyone that in order to play you are going to have to buy three copies of every book per player.
:( Everyone is killing their 5th edition threads, where will I be able to play the role of a supporter?
It would be kind of tough for them to stay in business without making new product lines. How many copies of PHB9 are you really going to sell?
As for the edition factions - I fail to see how asking for fan input on the next edition is a bad thing. In fact, I think it's an excellent idea in theory - sounds like they are taking a lesson from Pathfinder's success. We will have to wait and see how well they actually implement it in practice. Die-hard edition fans are always going to resist change, but from a revenue perspective if you are implementing feedback from the majority of you customers, you are going to ensure that the majority are going to back the new product.
They've obviously been thinking about it for a while - interesting article about journalists being shown "5e" but under NDA while ago here.Quote:
Originally Posted by unerwünscht
Wired.com has a great article about 5e.
https://www.wired.com/geekdad/2012/0...s-and-dragons/
in the article are links to articles by The Escapist about the past, present and future of d&d. Really good stuff and worth a read, except they don't actually talk about virtual table tops at all. Well they do mention wizards failure to get that done.
In the end it won't matter to me if 5th edition is great (my group will stay with savage worlds because we game in more then the fantasy setting), but at the least I hope it helps draw in another generation to role playing.
Read the Escapist's "bonus column" on ENWorldQuote:
Originally Posted by Monkeyboy
:mad:Quote:
The problem is that VTTs exist, and they’re not successful. If you give people the choice between a VTT and an MMO, they pick the MMO. The VTT doesn’t solve the real problem that is that the MMO experience is simply better for a significant portion of the former TRPG social network. My opinion is that a successful and widely used VTT will remain an elusive mirage despite how much effort is poured into developing them.
A very good read, thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by MurghBpurn
Spyke
I think Enworld is absolutely wrong about that. Find me a single MMO with an evolving story that can change on the fly based on what the players do. Find a single video game that will let you fully break from the mold and interact with absolutely anything and everything in the world. The simple fact is that no video game is capable of handling the anarchy and chaos of a true roleplaying game, so what they give us instead is are these Massively Multiplayer Games and the throw the word roleplaying in there hoping we will fall for the lies.
Sure the idiots of the world fall for it, but honestly do we want to play roleplaying games with idiots?
Might want to edit that post, as the link's been nuked...Quote:
Originally Posted by unerwünscht
Edited, thanks for pointing it out... One of these days someone will leave a 5th ed thread up and I will be able to anti-troll as a supporter of WotC. I thought it might be fun to be on the other side for once... So what if everyone knows I hate WotC, I was on the debate team, I can play either side of any field.Quote:
Originally Posted by MurghBpurn
Thanks for sharing that. good read for sure
Chris
Good read regarding the Darcy article, thanks for the link.
RPG's and VTT companies seem to have the same problem, which is generating a constant revenue stream after the release of a core product. Because with rpgs, if the core product is good, how much more do you need?
I sure don't want to have to purchase a new book every month and after 30+ years of playing RPG's (still got my original d&d boxed set somewhere complete with dice where the numbers needed to be filled with crayon) it just seems totally wrong to pay a monthly subscription to play.
Well, I'm not sure how successful it is for them but DDI addresses that exact issue. I wonder how many subscribers they have.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeyboy
To your point; I bought FG over six years ago. I do all my own stuff, so they made $40 off of me in five years until I bought an ultimate license and SW.
i agree - i think that FG might have a good installed base but i wonder how they can achieve consistent ongoing revenue....
A couple of things…
1) I'm not sure why WOTC is trying to reinvent the wheel. Seriously, why try invent a tabletop system when there are ALREADY alternatives out there? To me, that's like every video game company trying to put out their own consoles for play. Why not just license it out! You have a revenue stream from there, and gamers win.
2) I really don't get the whole hate on for WOTC daring to put out something new. Seriously? It was worse back in 2e when you had 16 or so different splat books (remember the "complete" books?), a million campaign settings, the Option books, etc? Fact is, the companies are in it to make money. RPGs are a money sink, period. If you aren't spending your money on books, it's miniatures, paints, terrain, dice, gadgets and gizmos to help you play. Back in the 90s I spent a couple thousand in a year easy.
3) Today we are spoiled because it's easier to get everything for free. Back then we didn't have P2P, or Internet. If we wanted it, we had to pay for it. Piracy was a LOT harder back then, unless you were into photocopying things.
4) I welcome a 5e if it will bring a FFF style of play back. I remember running RtttOEE in 3.5 and tearing my hair out because of the complexity. AOO's, stacking, etc. the game started becoming less fun, especially playing online … and I was using DMGenie! If 5e can bring back the simple fun of PLAYING, I'm all for it. I haven't gotten much into 4e, because it just didn't really appeal to me, and frankly, 3.5 bored the hell out of me. 2e - well, don't really want to go back to THAC0, thank You very much LOL.
I loved DMGenie. He had some really nice features in there and it was a fun hobby adding in various new bells and whistles.
I'm also glad to see 5E coming out. I played a ton of 2E within a handful of different worlds (Dark Sun, Spelljammer, Forgotten Realms, Kara Tur, etc.) and then 3.0, 3.5 and 4E. I actually preferred 3.5 to 4E, although I thought it was still possible to run a game in 4E that was fun. I really like a lot of things Monte has worked on, so I'm interested to see how it turns out. I typically try to support as many gaming companies as I can and WoTC more so than others I suppose since they are the license holders to the first RPG I ever played. I'm sure I would still be buying a bunch of TSR product if they were still around.