Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account
Photo

DnD5e Anyone?


  • Please log in to reply
114 replies to this topic

#41 popper

popper

    RPGMP3 Patron

  • Patrons
  • 136 posts

Posted 11 January 2012 - 10:09 AM

It seems that while I am looking very forward to fifth edition I am in the minority on that front. I can certainly understand that as fourth edition was not for everyone. But every devil deserves its due and fourth edition presented several rule innovations that I incorporated into my 3rd edition game and presented a wealth of setting material that both gave me new ideas for my campaigns and reinvigorated my players interests in the hobby as a whole.

Now did it have weaknesses?

Certainly. There is nothing like being a fully combat oriented player and finding that you now have powers. Sure, they're nice; but really I just want to beat the ork to death with my club - not use a power that does 4d6 damage + Str modifier.

I digressed just a bit there.

Anyway, the thing that makes me so excited about fifth edition is the way that the writing at Wizards of the Coast has improved over the course of the last five years. Four of my all-time favorite D&D books were published during this time: Heroes of Horror (3.5), Dark Sun Campaign setting (4th), Tomb of Magic (3.5), and the Eberron Campaign Guide (4th). These books were great and have really inspired me to take my game to the next level. Also articles like Legends and Lore by Mike Mearls and Monte Cook and The Dungeon Master Experience by Chris Perkins have really elevated my expectations from myself and my campaign when I run as a Dungeon Master. And their use of pod casts to help demonstrate the game with Penny Arcade and Robot Chicken attracted my attention after I had initially be put off by the powers system. So I think that if handled correctly, and I think the game is in good hands with Mike and Monte in the hen house, that fifth edition will be good.

And I like the idea of modularization. It's a concept that plays to the strengths of the "do-it-yourself" culture that has surrounded Dungeons and Dragons since its creation.
  • 0

#42 Ashiruni

Ashiruni

    Kobold

  • Members
  • 71 posts
  • LocationWashington

Posted 12 January 2012 - 08:58 PM

Well, I'm quite firmly on the 'set on another system' category. I liked aspects of 3.5 a lot. When you get a good DM who puts the screen and battle mat aside and just starts spinning a tale for you.... it could literally be awe-inspiring what could happen. I can't tell you how many times I have sat, utterly entranced as the story unfolded.

I can recall, with utter clarity, my first encounter with the Tomb of Horrors. The grimace on the face of one of my more seasoned compatriots as I foolishly ran forth into the sphere of annihilation, certain that it was the right way to go. That shock and dismay that filled me as my DM told me, in no uncertain terms, that my character ceased to be. That 5 months of work, of learning and growing and understanding and breathing life into this character and, suddenly, it's gone.

These kinds of moments are the whole point and purpose to playing a game like this. Sure, some folks min-max things to let them have more control over the story, but it's understandable because of how the game is played.

And then came 4th ed. Everything I had always associated with roleplaying was suddenly reduced to *COMBAT!* story line to get you to the next encounter *COMBAT!* etc. There is no point in becoming emotionally attached to the character, it takes 30 seconds to roll up a new one, and the plotting and planning on how to advance, how the character thinks and acts and talks are filled in, not with the thought and planning of the player, not with their time and effort and love, but from the nearest and most readily available stereotype that fits the bill. I have actually walked in on a friend of mine browsing TV tropes looking for 4th ed character ideas, and, more than anything else, that destroyed my love of the title.

After that shock and stark contrast, I don't think I'll ever go back to WotC. If and when the name Dungeons and Dragons is picked up by another brand who is dedicated to the story, I will pick it up again and give it another chance, but, as someone who literally grew up on second ed. and spent much of my teenage years playing 3.5, I don't intend to spend any more time, effort, or money on the label until WotC lets go of it.
  • 0

#43 Daniel

Daniel

    Gelatinous Cube

  • Members
  • 2,825 posts
  • LocationYork

Posted 13 January 2012 - 12:59 PM

Well, to chuck fuel on the fire, I've signed up to playtest: For Science! :D
  • 0

#44 dualshock71

dualshock71

    Ghoul

  • Members
  • 964 posts
  • LocationConnecticut, USA

Posted 13 January 2012 - 02:53 PM

Oh lord, Illiani playing 5e. This should be a riot. :D
  • 0

#45 MelkiorWhiteblade

MelkiorWhiteblade

    Lantern Archon

  • Members
  • 1,186 posts
  • LocationRoseville, CA

Posted 13 January 2012 - 04:23 PM

Hmm. Monte Cook is brought on board. Starts writing articles, cannot comment on working on a new edition of the game on google plus...and the column is about D&D as a brand, the editions don't matter.

If I were WoTC/Hasbro and doing damage control, I'd ramp up the ghostwriting team, hire back the best game designers, and while working on a new edition concurrently start a marketing campaign about the brand.

Oh wait, is my skepticism showing?
  • 0

#46 Balgin

Balgin

    The Dwarf

  • Patrons
  • 2,109 posts
  • LocationRingwood, Hampshire, England

Posted 13 January 2012 - 10:26 PM

I think it's no coincidence that they recently sacked over two thirds of the 4th edition design team.


Ah yes. There we are. There we are. I couldn't find it earlier but look at the list! Look at the list!

How many 4th edition "big heads" rolling? I mean wow. They might not have publicly stated fourth edition was a great big steaming turd but this list kind of states otherwise.
  • 0

#47 Balgin

Balgin

    The Dwarf

  • Patrons
  • 2,109 posts
  • LocationRingwood, Hampshire, England

Posted 13 January 2012 - 11:44 PM

This playtest is called Caves of Chaos: "Join the first public playtest of the next iteration of the Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game. The playtest offers players the chance to run pre-generated 1st-level characters through the Caves of Chaos, a four-hour D&D adventure. Wizards of the Coast staff will be running several tables each day. As part of the playtest, participants must sign a special non-dislcosure agreement for playtesters."
Adventure Description: For years, Castellan Keep has stood on civilization’s frontier, commanding a grand view of that dismal realm known as the Borderlands. A forlorn place, rife with monsters and terrors beyond imagining, adventurers have used this fort to seek glory and plunder in this dangerous realm, to unearth fabulous treasures and destroy foul monsters. Of all the haunts found here, none equal the Caves of Chaos in both danger and the promise of reward. Rumors abound of the wicked humanoids, the sinister monsters, and the dark priests that run amok in this dungeon. Only the most cunning and bold adventurers dare to face the dreaded caverns. Do you have what it takes to survive the Caves of Chaos?


Seriously. B2? They're going to ruin B2 for 5th edition? Quite possibly the best adventure TSR ever wrote (with it's flaws) and they're going to do some dumbed down fly by attack style single session game just to use a familiar old title. That's depressing.
  • 0

#48 dualshock71

dualshock71

    Ghoul

  • Members
  • 964 posts
  • LocationConnecticut, USA

Posted 14 January 2012 - 12:10 AM

Well, they had to do something to lure back a few of the nostalgic old players they'd driven off. Not many, but every extra participant counts, if they're really trying to get their fat out of the fryer with this one. If it's good, they spread the word and those of us who're skeptical are more willing to listen to them. If it's bad, and they're smart, they'll see what goes wrong and work out the kinks. I can think of worse schemes.
  • 0

#49 Ieqo

Ieqo

    Lantern Archon

  • Members
  • 1,090 posts
  • LocationIts pronounced CHATT-uh-NOO-gah.

Posted 14 January 2012 - 10:28 AM

Well I for one have been doing my best not to be reactionary, but when I read this http://www.howlingtower.com] in which Steve Winter not only advances WotC's apparent strategy of "Blame The Fans" but also manages to equate older gamers who don't like 4e and say so (like me) with spouse-abusers... Yeah, suffice it to say I'm just about ready to start being reactionary.

Just doesn't seem like a very good way of bringing the "edition warriors" to the table. Looks more like a deliberate attempt to piss them off further...so you can continue calling them names.

I'm over it.
  • 0

#50 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 14 January 2012 - 12:06 PM

Well for me the telling thing is that prior to the 5E announcement, I had never seriously considered buying Pathfinder. Now however I find myself looking on the Paizo website and thinking "Hmmm... Only $10 for the core rules in PDF? Now that's pretty good!"

Telling.

:)
  • 0

#51 Lockhart

Lockhart

    Yorkton Gamer & RPGMP3 Professional

  • Administrators
  • 1,238 posts
  • Amazon Wishlist
  • LocationRegina, SK, Canada

Posted 14 January 2012 - 12:37 PM

Well I for one have been doing my best not to be reactionary, but when I read this http://www.howlingtower.com] in which Steve Winter not only advances WotC's apparent strategy of "Blame The Fans" but also manages to equate older gamers who don't like 4e and say so (like me) with spouse-abusers... Yeah, suffice it to say I'm just about ready to start being reactionary.

Just doesn't seem like a very good way of bringing the "edition warriors" to the table. Looks more like a deliberate attempt to piss them off further...so you can continue calling them names.

I'm over it.


I started reading that article. I only got three paragraphs in before I closed it. It basically read to me that he was saying "4e didn't work because the Internet was saying bad things about it and it threw off the customers."

The Internet is the voice of the customers. If there is rampant dislike for a product, those should be voices that should be listened too, not quelled. If you're getting bad press from your own customers, chances are you just have a bad product.
  • 0

#52 Daniel

Daniel

    Gelatinous Cube

  • Members
  • 2,825 posts
  • LocationYork

Posted 14 January 2012 - 01:05 PM

Oh lord, Illiani playing 5e. This should be a riot. :D

We'll see. Contrary to popular belief I don't want this edition to be bad, I'm really hoping something good can come out of WoTC. Monte was the man to get me to give it a chance, that name holds a lot of weight in my eyes. Mr. Cook's style of games are certainly not Tropis - or the style I tend to run - but I have a lot of respect for the man's products: He is one of the best minds we have in the industry atm; imo he is the only man for the job.
  • 0

#53 Daniel

Daniel

    Gelatinous Cube

  • Members
  • 2,825 posts
  • LocationYork

Posted 14 January 2012 - 01:16 PM

Well I for one have been doing my best not to be reactionary, but when I read this http://www.howlingtower.com in which Steve Winter not only advances WotC's apparent strategy of "Blame The Fans" but also manages to equate older gamers who don't like 4e and say so (like me) with spouse-abusers... Yeah, suffice it to say I'm just about ready to start being reactionary.


See, I've just read that blog-post and that isn't quite the message I got from it. While yes, I can't agree that there does seem to be a little "Blame the Fans" going on you can't disagree that some of the anti-4e phlegm was unnecessary trolling. We do love our editions, but I think at some point dislike for 4e became fashionable, with people who have never even picked up a 4e PHB declaring it a moral injustice just from the rumours they heard.

Now, I dislike 4e as much as the next guy, but for my own reasons. I feel that Winter's request for a "Live & Let Live" attitude from the Edition Warriors reasonable - if a little naive.
  • 0

#54 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 14 January 2012 - 02:42 PM

I did find this thread on rpg.net. Refreshingly, it asks people who didn't really like 4E which bits they thought worked well.

The answer was quite a lot. Refreshing to see a positive thread on the subject.

I really hope 5E turns out well. If they can do a great job, it'll be good for the hobby as a whole, I would say. Fingers crossed!
  • 0

#55 Ieqo

Ieqo

    Lantern Archon

  • Members
  • 1,090 posts
  • LocationIts pronounced CHATT-uh-NOO-gah.

Posted 14 January 2012 - 06:14 PM

It is refreshing to see a discussion thread dedicated to constructive discourse rather than the usual trollfest (and on rpgnet to boot!). I did notice a number of posters reading the talking points though; how many of them mentioned "save or die" situations? Did no one bother to whisper to them that they've been largely eliminated for, oh, twelve years now?

Still, I wish I could find that type of discussion on the Wizards forum.
  • 0

#56 Daniel

Daniel

    Gelatinous Cube

  • Members
  • 2,825 posts
  • LocationYork

Posted 14 January 2012 - 06:55 PM

Still, I wish I could find that type of discussion on the Wizards forum.

That bad? :S
  • 0

#57 Ieqo

Ieqo

    Lantern Archon

  • Members
  • 1,090 posts
  • LocationIts pronounced CHATT-uh-NOO-gah.

Posted 14 January 2012 - 07:11 PM

Still, I wish I could find that type of discussion on the Wizards forum.

That bad? :S

About half of it is polite--at least by forum standards--but the bulk of it is the usual Fanboy v. Fanboy bullshit. Person A says they want to get the feel of previous editions back and Persons B through G accuses him of wanting THAC0, wanting to rebuild 3.5, being a pedophile. You know: the usual.[/b]
  • 0

#58 Annatar

Annatar

    RPGMP3 Patron

  • Patrons
  • 13 posts

Posted 14 January 2012 - 08:30 PM

Well I for one have been doing my best not to be reactionary, but when I read this http://www.howlingtower.com] in which Steve Winter not only advances WotC's apparent strategy of "Blame The Fans" but also manages to equate older gamers who don't like 4e and say so (like me) with spouse-abusers... Yeah, suffice it to say I'm just about ready to start being reactionary.

Just doesn't seem like a very good way of bringing the "edition warriors" to the table. Looks more like a deliberate attempt to piss them off further...so you can continue calling them names.

I'm over it.


Isn't Steve Winter one of those responsible for 4th Edition, who has been fired now? So his view is not really the view of the current design team headed by Mike Mearls and Monte Cook. Actually, he suspiciously sounds like someone whose pet game wasn't generally liked and whose failure he now blames on those who didn't like the game, instead of just seeing that it failed entirely on its own merits.
  • 0

#59 Ieqo

Ieqo

    Lantern Archon

  • Members
  • 1,090 posts
  • LocationIts pronounced CHATT-uh-NOO-gah.

Posted 14 January 2012 - 08:39 PM

He's involved in some capacity, as indicated by Monte's twitter and facebook feeds.
  • 0

#60 MelkiorWhiteblade

MelkiorWhiteblade

    Lantern Archon

  • Members
  • 1,186 posts
  • LocationRoseville, CA

Posted 14 January 2012 - 08:45 PM

Okay, got some more ranting in me it seems:

When 4e came out, WotC pulled their license agreement KenzerCo. Kenzero had released all of their Kalamar products for 3.x using that D&D license, not under D20. And, their Hackmaster game was based on AD&D 2e as well. It kind of forced their hand. They did well I think though. They converted their stuff over to d20 and rereleased it in PDF and also came out with a new version of Hackmaster which was a new system.

Also, their digital 'initiative' really got my ire up. I never paid for it, and I'm glad because they never did deliver the digital table top (did they?), and they were only supporting 4e. I might have done it for access to the digital equivalent of their magazines (which they pulled away from Paizo, don't know how that affected their business outlook...), had they supported 3.5 in them, which they didn't.

So ya know what, WotC kind of started the edition wars themselves by distancing themselves from previous versions of the game (the above, PDFgate, the podcast becoming so focused on 4e and not 'D&D' in general).
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Gravityscan Badge