5th Edition D&D Predictions?

What do you think?

It's going to suck a lot more than 4e.	0.0%	[ 0 ]
It'll be as bad as 4e was.	2.2%	[ 1 ]
It'll be better than 4e was.	15.2%	[ 7 ]
It'll be the most awesome edition yet!	4.3%	[ 2 ]
I'm waiting 'til it comes out to form an opinion.	47.8%	[ 22 ]
I don't care. I'm still playing [insert fav edition].	23.9%	[ 11 ]
Gold plz, k thx bai.	6.5%	[ 3 ]
Total Votes:			[ 46 ]

[MythosRattus]

So, apparently WotC has gotten tired of all the angry wailing and is coming out with a new edition of D&D. They say they want to fix the problems the last one had and are even taking player input in order to make the game better (and probably to avoid another dose of the vitriolic backlash they got from a lot of people for what they did with 4th).
Do you think they'll end up making the game better or worse?

I think it'll probably be better, even just a little... 'cause 4e was about as bad as it could possibly get so they've got nowhere to go but up. It's like they were trying to make a pen and paper version of WoW... and failed spectacularly. I can understand trying to make the game easy enough for new players but setting it up so the game does most of the playing for me is the wrong way to go about it. As far as I'm concerned, the only way to improve it would be to set it on fire and retcon it from existence, then go back to 3.5 and tweak the problems out of that... and include a conciliatory box of chocolates with every purchase.

[Banshi]

MythosRattus

I think it'll probably be better, even just a little... 'cause 4e was about as bad as it could possibly get so they've got nowhere to go but up. It's like they were trying to make a pen and paper version of WoW... and failed spectacularly. I can understand trying to make the game easy enough for new players but setting it up so the game does most of the playing for me is the wrong way to go about it. As far as I'm concerned, the only way to improve it would be to set it on fire and retcon it from existence, then go back to 3.5 and tweak the problems out of that... and include a conciliatory box of chocolates with every purchase.

Could you toss in a few more dumb complaints? I've almost got a bingo on my sheet.

Anyway, 5th ed just got announced recently and will most likely be in development for the next year or two at least. It's release will correspond with Wizards' regular planned edition cycle, maybe a little sooner, but not by more than a year or so. Whining and speculation is to be expected, though until I see what their plan is for the new edition, I've chosen not to get all riled up. My friends and I enjoy our 4th Ed game very much and, depending on Wizards' plan, will most likely be late adopters to the new edition, waiting a year or so after it's initial release to begin giving it a spin after we gauge its level of support and functionality. I don't particularly care for the idea of crowd sourcing this edition amongst the fan-base because the fan-base has shown time and time again to be small-picture thinking idiots.

[Michael-OBrien]

Banshi

MythosRattus

I think it'll probably be better, even just a little... 'cause 4e was about as bad as it could possibly get so they've got nowhere to go but up. It's like they were trying to make a pen and paper version of WoW... and failed spectacularly. I can understand trying to make the game easy enough for new players but setting it up so the game does most of the playing for me is the wrong way to go about it. As far as I'm concerned, the only way to improve it would be to set it on fire and retcon it from existence, then go back to 3.5 and tweak the problems out of that... and include a conciliatory box of chocolates with every purchase.

Could you toss in a few more dumb complaints? I've almost got a bingo on my sheet.

Anyway, 5th ed just got announced recently and will most likely be in development for the next year or two at least. It's release will correspond with Wizards' regular planned edition cycle, maybe a little sooner, but not by more than a year or so. Whining and speculation is to be expected, though until I see what their plan is for the new edition, I've chosen not to get all riled up. My friends and I enjoy our 4th Ed game very much and, depending on Wizards' plan, will most likely be late adopters to the new edition, waiting a year or so after it's initial release to begin giving it a spin after we gauge its level of support and functionality. I don't particularly care for the idea of crowd sourcing this edition amongst the fan-base because the fan-base has shown time and time again to be small-picture thinking idiots.

They hired Monte Cook back on so I have a feeling it'll sway back toward a 3.X/Pathfinder feel. I gave 4th Ed a shot, it just didn't fit my play style. There is a huge list of concepts that need to be adjusted/axed/added from both 3.X and 4th Ed.

-health/damage asymmetry
-high level effects will actually have to reflect the reality of high level
-a decent default campaign setting
-SKILLS
-core classes that actually feel like they play differently from each other.

That's my personal wishlist. I'm sure there's other stuff, but this is what I'd be satisfied with.

[MerlinsMage]

I genuinely feel that WotC will fix the game with 5e. They KNOW that they screwed up with 4e.

How? They took a game that was at the pinnacle of awesomeness and took it to a totally beginner level. If I were JUST starting to play, 4e would be my first choice. It's simplistic and if anyone has played a video game RPG, they can pick it up. Even if they haven't, they can learn it. But for an experienced player? It's too simple, it's too broken.

I think with player input for 5e, they will get input from older players(even as far back as 2e) and it will truly combine the best of all of the Editions and turn them into one Mega-Edition. They're promising it to be very modular, allowing for whatever style of play YOU want. So if you want a 4e feel, you can use the rules sets that allow for it. Same with 3.5, 2e, ect. Or if you want a very new feel for a game, mix and match. I can't wait for it BECAUSE it promises big.

Also, if they got Monte Cook back, then whatever they do with the game, it will have flow and character.... I've got my hopes up for this one. And if it bombs... I'll just stick with 3.5/Pathfinder.

[Laertes Ursus]

The only thing I predict is another edition holy war. Wizards doesn't seem to get that it'll always happen and that it is literally impossible to get 100% market coverage.

[Neko Ewen]

If they learn from the actual mistakes of 4E (like having skill challenges be half-baked) instead of the things that make 3.5 fans rage on the internet (classes are "all the same" even though in real life they're not), 5E has a chance of being pretty great.

Laertes Ursus

The only thing I predict is another edition holy war. Wizards doesn't seem to get that it'll always happen and that it is literally impossible to get 100% market coverage.

Well, I can see why they want to get more of the fanbase than they currently have, even if I also think there are toxic elements to said fanbase that the game would be better off without.

[MerlinsMage]

I'll agree with the toxic elements statement, 100%

[Synria Frahy]

I thought Banshi's comment was unnecessary and OP's got a point.
(not to mention a little rude)

In essence, Fourth edition could've been better, but so much can be said about all editions so far. Wizards even said themselves it was meant to attract a new generation of gamers who were playing games like WoW.

For instance, I myself prefer 3.5, but it was also easy to break.
I had this one guy in my group doing obscene amounts of damage by level 3,
I had to houserule the s**t out of my game.

4th had a simpler character creation structure, and I like that.
But 4th also had too many books.
I know it was meant to streamline things, but I felt that all the books at their abhorrent prices just wasn't doing it for me.
I know, I know, torrent torrent torrent. But I believe in actually buying the gaming books you love.

[Liquidor]

Synria Frahy

But 4th also had too many books.
I know it was meant to streamline things, but I felt that all the books at their abhorrent prices just wasn't doing it for me.
I know, I know, torrent torrent torrent. But I believe in actually buying the gaming books you love.

4th edition has like half the amount of books 3.0 or 3.5 has. Plus ebay has most 4th ed books from 75% to 30% MSRP. Its all a matter of knowing how to shop.

[Banshi]

Synria Frahy

But 4th also had too many books.
I know it was meant to streamline things, but I felt that all the books at their abhorrent prices just wasn't doing it for me.
I know, I know, torrent torrent torrent. But I believe in actually buying the gaming books you love.

You are aware that by this time in it's life-cycle, 3.X had more books and had managed to con players into buying the same books twice through a half edition. Aslo I'm pretty sure 3.5 still has more books. Even more so if you add in Pathfinder's pile.

Also I feel my comment, however harsh was completely justified. There is a reason why there are joke games to be played over these commonly voiced complaints. It's the same kind of game scientists play with fundies that try to dispute fact with faith.

[LiaThistle]

Synria Frahy

I thought Banshi's comment was unnecessary and OP's got a point.
(not to mention a little rude)

Liq covered the second important part of your post, so I guess I'll cover this one.

Personally, I think he's dead on the money in his assessment of the OP. The OP is exactly the sort of toxicity that helps my decision to drop the D&D line hold steady whenever I'm browsing pap rpgs.

[Synria Frahy]

Banshi

Synria Frahy

But 4th also had too many books.
I know it was meant to streamline things, but I felt that all the books at their abhorrent prices just wasn't doing it for me.
I know, I know, torrent torrent torrent. But I believe in actually buying the gaming books you love.

You are aware that by this time in it's life-cycle, 3.X had more books and had managed to con players into buying the same books twice through a half edition.

Also I feel my comment, however harsh was completely justified. There is a reason why there are joke games to be played over these commonly voiced complaints. It's the same kind of game scientists play with fundies that try to dispute fact with faith.

I'm pretty sure scientists don't use "Your comments and viewpoints are dumb!" when battling logic with fundamentalists. I'm also sure they don't say "Well I sure like my science!"
I'm also sure they use reasoning like
"But then how do you account for dinosaur bones and mountains?"
Comparing your argument with OP which was almost entirely based around your opinion for 4th edition with the number crunching and reasoning of a scientist is overstating this thread exponentially. This thread is about speculation and opinions.

[Synria Frahy]

LiaThistle

Synria Frahy

I thought Banshi's comment was unnecessary and OP's got a point.
(not to mention a little rude)

Liq covered the second important part of your post, so I guess I'll cover this one.

Personally, I think he's dead on the money in his assessment of the OP. The OP is exactly the sort of toxicity that helps my decision to drop the D&D line hold steady whenever I'm browsing pap rpgs.

Now we're going to say there's a "cancer" playing D&D?
If anything anyone playing D&D is a good thing!
I think it's pretentious and unwelcoming bunch who make table top gamers as a whole look unapproachable and uninviting to newer players.

[Kaim Arouet]

Synria Frahy

LiaThistle

Synria Frahy

I thought Banshi's comment was unnecessary and OP's got a point.
(not to mention a little rude)

Liq covered the second important part of your post, so I guess I'll cover this one.

Personally, I think he's dead on the money in his assessment of the OP. The OP is exactly the sort of toxicity that helps my decision to drop the D&D line hold steady whenever I'm browsing pap rpgs.

Now we're going to say there's a "cancer" playing D&D?
If anything anyone playing D&D is a good thing!
I think it's pretentious and unwelcoming bunch who make table top gamers as a whole look unapproachable and uninviting to newer players.

Honestly I believe the people who start edition wars are the worse.

[LiaThistle]

Comments like:

Quote:

'cause 4e was about as bad as it could possibly get so they've got nowhere to go but up.

Quote:

It's like they were trying to make a pen and paper version of WoW... and failed spectacularly.

Quote:

As far as I'm concerned, the only way to improve it would be to set it on fire and retcon it from existence, then go back to 3.5 and tweak the problems out of that... and include a conciliatory box of chocolates with every purchase.

are toxic.

They spark edition wars, discourage people from checking out the currently published systems, discourage people from checking out the line at all because of the elitism that's present, and discourage people who'd consider RPGs because they play WoW and had heard 4th ed dubbed "WoW on paper."

That's not the kind of person I want in my gaming circle. So, if you want to call the attitude of someone who's pointing out that the OP is nothing more than hateful opinion a "cancer," then I'm going to have to disagree. The OP is the "cancer."

I also disagree with "anyone playing D&D is a good thing." It's not for everyone, and some people, like it or not, just aren't mentally fit to be playing. Doesn't mean I won't find out the hard way whether or not I want person x in my group, but that doesn't mean that I also won't decide that they don't belong in my group.


Additionally, though not addressed to me, your comments about scientists vs. fundamentalists demonstrates ignorance to me. Living in a state where people are nearly as religious as those in the Arab East, I had to put up with their arguments from middle school through the end of collage - and the common extreme answers for them were along the lines of "it's your right to believe that," and "God put it there for us to find." Things that you or I may accept as scientific fact just aren't real to some of the extremists.