D&D 5E Would you consider 5th edition?

[Kzach]

This isn't a troll.

No, seriously, it isn't.

Ok, I know that saying it isn't is usually a good sign that it is, but hear me out first.

This is a question to 4e fans only, hence being posted in the 4e forum. I'm a 4e fan myself and I feel that with the separation of the forums, topics like this are no longer really the flame-bait they once were.

If you had thrown 4e in front of me two years ago and said, "Whattaya think?" I probably would've flipped through it and gone, "Meh, it's not D&D," much like a lot of people have, and still do, in regards to the new edition.

Having given up on 3e and previous to its release, having given up on all previous editions of D&D, I was, however, on the look-out for something to scratch the D&D itch. I toyed with a few systems but never found anything that grabbed me.

So during the gradual course of 4e's release, I slowly became accustomed to it and gave it more of a chance than I would've had I just picked up the book out of the blue with no lead-up or prolonged exposure to it.

And I'm really glad I did.

But this brings up two convergent possibilities for me for when 5e comes around. On one side, I'm now quite happy with 4e and have no reason to look for anything new. Much like people who were happy with 2e are still playing it, or 3e, or even BECMI, they've found their niche and stuck with it.

I could quite happily buy up all the books if DDI ever went offline and make sure I kept back-ups of the CB and MB and could feasibly run and play in 4e games till the day I die.

But what if I didn't give 4e a chance? Then I would never have known it was my favourite edition. Again, if you'd asked me if I wanted powers usable per encounter or day, I probably would've scoffed. 4e was the edition I didn't even know I wanted.

So when 5e comes around... will I give it a chance? Or will I simply be happy with 4e and not bother?

These are the questions I ask myself, and so now ask you as well.

 

[Holy Bovine]

Is this a troll?













I had to!!

As for the actual question for myself it really depends on what 5E brings to the table. For me I had burned out on DMing 3E in a huge way (3 campaigns run to 16th-21st level over the course of 8 years) and had no interest in DMing again. 4E came along and, initially I was very skeptical and really had no intention of getting yet another edition of D&D. The fact that 4E was such a departure from other editions was its number 1 selling point to me. I wanted that huge separation from the past. I have all that older stuff and if I want to play it I'll just dig it out and play it! I judge a game on its own merits and don 't really care about the past - I want new locations, new adventures, new stories. It is actually mind boggling to me that people still clamor for revisions of stuff like the G123 Against the Giants series - can't we have something new and fresh?

So 5E will have to undergo the same scrutiny that 4E, 3E and 2E underwent. If I like the approach I'll get it, if not I'll skip it.

 

[Zaran]

I would much rather Wizards to rewrite the first few 4e books using the ideas they learned after release.

That being said I feel like Wizards is running out of ideas. That means they either need to go in a different direction with future products or continue to pull new classes and races out of a hat to fill their books. I honestly do not want to see any more new classes.

So knowing that they have to keep swimming or sink. They either have to regurgitate the game in some way (They are doing this a bit already with the Red Box line) or come up with something new. I think now that they have got 3 phbs out they should work on giving GMs campaign tools such as sourcebooks for different areas of already printed worlds like Forgotten Realms or Eberron. Or give players other things to do besides combat with sourcebooks such as stronghold building or life on the seas.

I do not want to buy a whole new edition of books unless 5th edition would be compatible with 4e characters.

 

[KarinsDad]

It really depends on what the rules are like.

4E still has some glaring issues from my perspective:

1) No in combat scrolls. There should be a way to quickly cast a ritual like Knock in combat. Some of my fondest memories in earlier editions was when the party was in dire straits and a player pulled out an old dusty scroll that had been on his character sheet for 9 months and he saves the day with it.

2) One round durations. WotC said "Oh, a few PCs casting a few spells over the entire party for the encounter encounter is bad, instead we will have EVERY PC effectively cast spells over the entire party and/or the enemies for some fraction of a round". Effect durations end at the start of your next turn, the end of your next turn, the start of the foe's next turn, the end of the foe's next turn, after a save is made, or until the end of the encounter.

The problem here is the vast number of conditions on PCs and NPCs at any given time. We use little plastic rings that we put on the miniatures and we often have 20 or more of these rings out on the miniatures at any given time.

That's a LOT of bookkeeping. Every single creature's turn tends to result in little plastic rings either being put on some miniatures, or off of some miniatures. The game is all about condition tracking now.

We waste a lot of time in game figuring out exactly all of the modifiers to a given situation and tracking the changes of them.

3) Very few higher level At Will powers. For the most part, the dinky little At Wills learned at low level stick with the PC his entire life. Yawn. Paragon Level and Epic Level should add in a new cool At Will while maintaining the original Heroic At Wills. Learning new Encounter and Daily powers is fine, but only learning those is meh. The focus should be more on multiple At Wills and less on multiple Encounter and Dailies.

4) Limited balance of power sources. I really dislike the concept that "if the Wizard can do an area attack, the Fighter must be able to do an area attack". And not just with his sword. He can do things like Come and Get It where he somehow mystically forces his foes to move, even if they don't want to, from 15 feet away. I think the distinction between the power sources should be better defined. Sorry, but your Fighter just isn't going to heal himself and your Rogue isn't going to Teleport due to class powers.

Better expressed, I dislike magical effects in the Martial powers source. Rationals aside, having a dying PC suddenly jump up and be mostly whole and hearty because a Warlord ally across the room yelled "Get Up!" feels too much like magic to me.

I do not like the current entitlement system that all power sources are entitled to all types of effects. I think each power source should be special in it's own unique way. Divine should be the healers and supporters. Arcane should be the teleporters and multiple target damage dealers. Martial should be the single target damage dealers and focused on what the PC can personally do (climb, jump, attack, etc.), not what the PC can mystically do beyond himself (teleport, fly, fireball). The line is pretty darn blurry in 4E. As an example in 3E, when the Simbul healing spells first came out, it was lame. Wizards could now heal. Meh.

Granted, this sounds like a rant. It isn't. I just prefer segregation of abilities via power source.

5) More focus on non-attack powers. The vast majority of powers in the game system do damage. It would be nice if each player had more than just a few utility powers at his disposal. The ability to cast rituals with scrolls would help with this.

 

[renau1g]

Is this a troll?

No, no... the two trolls on the site are Nifft & Kamikaze Midget ...seriously, even Morrus has dubbed them trolls (EN World D&D / RPG News: The world's premier fan community for Dungeons & Dragons news and more!)

To be honest if 5e improved on the speed of 4e combat, but kept the tactical considerations, improved some of the broken elements of the game (IMO the multi-attackers) and managed to come up with a really cool way of adjudicating skill challenges to feel more organic then I'd look at it. If they actually made the choice of race matter throughout a characters career (as was one of their design goals and I don't feel it was met very well) then I'd definitely consider it. If they didn't have stupid math issues that require feats to fix, I'd be a happy camper.

So in summary, yes I would, I like new editions, it keeps the game fresh for me. I tried to play a retro game the other day using 2e rules and was like WTF Thac0? 3/2 attacks/round? It seemed so awkward to me after using the new ruleset (I respect everyone's choice to play their own rules, but I'm expressing my opinion of it right now).

I also want new adventures that are going to be considered "classics" ala the Against the Giants series or the Tomb of Horrors, or even the 3.5e Red Hand of Doom (my favourite module of that era).

Improvement to the Power Sources would be welcome as well.

 

[Mengu]

4.1 (or 4.5 or 5.0 or soft edition whatever you want to call it) completely in digital media is what I want. If something isn't working as intended, they change it in the "software" and they're done. All this worry about what's already been published is making progress more difficult.

Currently with the published books, it feels like they find their published material too sacred to change. If the system could be a bit more fluid, and fixes could be done at a more global level, there would be much greater benefits.

Compendium, Character Builder, and Monster Builder have the potential to redefine the game. There is a glitch with the math, and a +1 attack/defense bonus needs to be built into characters at levels 5/15/25? No problem. Adjust it in the CB, done. Monster non-AC attacks are all a point too high? Again not a problem, change them all, done. We made these bracers that give +2/4/6 damage bonus, and now no one wants to use these other items, what should we do? Remove it? Nah, it speeds uop PC damage which is needed. Add it as an item property to every existing arm slot item at level 6/16/26, okay, done, all those other items have been re-introduced to the game, making our shiny armbands a bit vanilla, but who cares.

A few rules clarifications can be resolved by enhancements to the power cards, making the latest card the authority on rules interpretations. Not sure how to add your weapon focus to Whirling Frenzy? Just look at the card.

I feel like we're almost caught up to the digital age. When I'm running a game, only rules related materials I use are my encounter sheets I build in word and print out. Only materials the players use are the character sheets from CB. We don't really need books (maybe just some quick reference sheets). While running a game, only time I pull out a book is to show the picture of a monster or race to a new player.

A move towards a rules software... That's what I want to see most in a new version. A fluid system that caters to community needs in a timely manner.

Don't get me wrong I don't want to play on a computer (FtF is the one aspect of D&D that should not be lost). But since our reference materials already have been reduced to just a bunch of computer print outs, may as well capitalize on other benefits of using digital media such as easier, more frequent, and more meaningful updates.

 

[jgsugden]

This is waaaaaaaay too open of a question. What would 5E be? How would it be different than 4E?

Personally, I think we need to wait 3 more years (we hope) until they announce 5E's structure befoer we can judge. At that time, my groups will evaluate what makes the most sense.

 

[Infiniti2000]

This is waaaaaaaay too open of a question. What would 5E be? How would it be different than 4E?

Those aren't the questions though. The questions: So when 5e comes around... will I give it a chance? Or will I simply be happy with 4e and not bother?

My answer is yes to the first and not likely to the second.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

Obviously, it depends on what's in 5e. I like KarinsDad's list for a start.

Nifft isn't a troll, silly. Can't you see the cute, lovable penguin?

 

[renau1g]

Naw that's just a disguise to lull you into a false sense of security, then the real Nifft comes out.