D&D 5th Edition Announced

[Derek Hiemforth]

Link to story at NY Times

That was very quick. I guess the success of Pathfinder and the dissatisfaction of many folks over D&D4 must have been pretty huge. 'Cause this seems awfully risky to me, looking from the outside in...

[Lord Mhoram]

They just had a formal announcement.

They want the fans to help - give ideas, and they are going to have an open playtest of it.
Link to official announcement (and signup)

I'm in. I've liked something about every edition of D&D (even after Hero, it was my second go to system). This could be really interesting

[Susano]

Here in this NY Times article (that you may, or may not, be able to read.)

http://nyti.ms/xCuiYn

[Ragitsu]

I wonder how MMORPG-y 5th Edition will be.

[Certified]

This is not surprising. The question is will they be addressing the concerns that drove players to Pathfinder or will they continue down the current route of simplify to the point of pain.

[Hermit]

Ha ha...
oh, this is funny in its timing. My group is just now getting into Pathfinder and most agree to making the switch. It was actually easier than I anticipated. Many were not happy with the direction D&D took. They, like I, were REALLY displeased what happened to the Forgotten Realms. I doubt we'll be switching back despite this announcement. While I know the D&D 4th Ed has its fans, it certainly does seem to be an unspoken admission on the WoTC's part that they burned some bridges and may have made some mistakes. I commend them, to be fair, for trying to make the fans feel a part of it with massive player testing. If I remember, Pathfinder did that before them, and it worked fairly well for Paizo.

That said, I think I'll pass.

[teh bunneh]

It seems like I'm in the minority of D&D players, but I really enjoyed D&D4 (despite being a skeptic at first). At the same time, I hated 3.x. I thought 3.x was a huge step backwards in gaming (having ran one year-long campaign and played in two others). I haven't played Pathfinder, since (from what I understand) it's just a re-skin of 3.5 with prettier page layouts, and I'm pretty much done with 3.x. We'll see what D&D5 looks like, but if they're planning to move back to the 3.x model, you can count me out.

[Lord Mhoram]

There is a thread about it in general RP too.

They are planning to have open playtest, and want input on what the game is like from fans. You can sign up here

I've liked every edition of D&D that I've played (never played OD&D, but played from teh first basic set up to 4E) - some I like more than others, but every version has had something useful to it.

I'm interested to see where it goes - and I signed up as a playtester.

[Hermit]

It seems like I'm in the minority of D&D players, but I really enjoyed D&D4 (despite being a skeptic at first). At the same time, I hated 3.x. I thought 3.x was a huge step backwards in gaming (having ran one year-long campaign and played in two others). I haven't played Pathfinder, since (from what I understand) it's just a re-skin of 3.5 with prettier page layouts, and I'm pretty much done with 3.x. We'll see what D&D5 looks like, but if they're planning to move back to the 3.x model, you can count me out.

Actually Bunneh, if you have the time, you're just the sort of player I'd suggest on their open play testing and input. You've played multiple systems, you've got a good grasp of GMing needs, and you don't get stuck in ruts like I do but you also know what you like when you find it.

And I say that as someone who really liked the 3.5 ed model

[Querysphinx]

Why would I want to play D&D when I have Hero?

[Susano]

This is not surprising. The question is will they be addressing the concerns that drove players to Pathfinder or will they continue down the current route of simplify to the point of pain.

The article says they're going to be asking the players what they want. Considering the popularity of Pathfinder... D&D 5E might end up being more like Pathfinder and less like a tabletop MMO.

[Lord Mhoram]

What I find interesting is that they said they want Modular design. So they can add in or remove modules for different things. That could really be interesting.

It could be that is how they want to appeal to a bigger audience have a "simple" module for combat and a "detailed" one - for those that wish 1st ed kind of combat, or those that was 4E version. Similar things with feats or powers - It could end up like Fuzion for plugins, or a game engine, with each Group choosing which way they want to play. But of course that would lead to the fracturing of the player base that they want to avoid.

The possibilities intrigue me.

[Susano]

More: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.a...d/4ll/20120109

[Derek Hiemforth]

I wonder how MMORPG-y 5th Edition will be.

Depends at least partially on what fan input they get, I suppose. But I suspect it will be much less MMORPG-y than D&D4 apparently was, given that Pathfinder's runaway success using the D&D3.5 engine is undoubtedly one of the biggest factors driving this move...

[Lawnmower Boy]

Four years? I hear many smart people that I'm inclined to trust say that D&D4 is a good gaming experience, so that's clearly not the issue here. I'm also pretty sure that the "consumers don't know that they want D&D4 argument" isn't going to fly any more than when we hear the same argument from any number of other marketing flops. (Sigh. WebOS.) WotC has an iconic imagination capital* here. It needs to capitalise on it.



*Intellectual capital: Illithids and hit dice; imagination capital: the world our brains enter when we think about D&D.