What I'm trying to speculate here is whether there will be a 5th edition.
I think that 4e is pretty awesome and that there is no way that D&D can get better, but then again, I thought that about 3.5e before 4e came out. I'm sure that anyone that played 1st edition thought that it was the best before second edition came out.
So, will there be a 5th edition? If so, what do you think it will be like?
There will be. Every RPG system that lasts more than a couple of years does.
When? Impossible to say.
What it will be like? Also impossible to say. One could see parts of 4e design appearing in the latter days of 3rd, as most of the development staff changed. I suspect that we'll see similar things as developers and designers quit and are replaced later in 4e's life.
Watch and wait for a book that totally throws the mechanics for a loop. In 3e it was Book of Nine Swords. That was basically a precursor for 4e (the Devs mentioned in an interview it was like a test run for 4e).
There will absolutely be a fifth edition, just like there will be a Starcraft 2, Diablo 3, Gears of War 3... The structure and business model of Wizards requires that they continue to produce content to make money, eventually that will mean they will have to start over with a new version, or they will simply run out of content. At the same time new versions help them appeal to new audiences, and work on areas of the game they feel can be improved. Yes, it will happen. When? Probably not for a long, long time; 4e has a great future ahead for itself.
D&D has changed over time, adopting new mechanics, ideas, and flavor from other games, fantasy novels, hollywood movies, and other aspects of fantasy "pop culture".
To know what 5e will look like, we'd need to know what will be popular in the next few years. Assuming a 6-8 year lifespan for 4e and a one-year design time for 5e, that would put the earliest release date for 5e in 2013? 2014?
Unless somebody here knows what will be popular in 2011-2013, I don't see how we could do much more than make wild speculations as to what might be included in a later edition.
Personally, I just hope it doesn't end up being influenced by things like Twilight...
>_<
Watch and wait for a book that totally throws the mechanics for a loop. In 3e it was Book of Nine Swords. That was basically a precursor for 4e (the Devs mentioned in an interview it was like a test run for 4e).
4E is continually coming up with new and different mechanics with each PHB, DMG or power source. My idea is that 4E will grow and adapt until it becomes too unwieldy for even it's DDi apps to accommodate.
Then 5E will come along with a totally new conceptualizaion of the PC class that allows almost total customization.
Bel
Maybe "throw the mechanics for a loop" was a bad phrase. Yes, 4e is always comign up with new mechanics (as did 3e). Much like you said, when character conceptualization changes is when you may see the dawnign of a new system. i think you said it better than I did. 
When Bo9S came along it totally changed character progression and how they worked within the level system. When 4e came out you coudl see how it was a decendent of the Bo9S.
Just look at when a new edition of Star Wars RPG comes out. It has been said that SWSE is like the half step between 3.5 and 4.0. I guess since the SWRPG market is smaller its a good place to test ideas before putting them into the much larger DnD market.
Of course, thats just the theory on the SWSE boards.
I'm sure 5E will exist. And I predict (and wish) it will be even more "computerized" than 4E is with its tools.
I'm sure 5E will exist. And I predict (and wish) it will be even more "computerized" than 4E is with its tools.
Exactly why I'm ending my career as a D&D consumer with 4e. I'm done buying new editions for that very reason. Players are so lazy now that the idea of writing out characters in notebooks using the gaming books is too much work.
I actually had a friends friend want to join in on a game I'm running, then he found out I am not a DDI subscriber and said nevermind. My friend was upset about it, as he consider his friend very rude about how he handled things, but I just laughed and told him not to worry about it.
I don't want a D&D player in my games, when that player considers reading rulebooks and "writing", too much work.... Kids these days.
Exactly why I'm ending my career as a D&D consumer with 4e. I'm done buying new editions for that very reason. Players are so lazy now that the idea of writing out characters in notebooks using the gaming books is too much work.
I actually had a friends friend want to join in on a game I'm running, then he found out I am not a DDI subscriber and said nevermind. My friend was upset about it, as he consider his friend very rude about how he handled things, but I just laughed and told him not to worry about it.
I don't want a D&D player in my games, when that player considers reading rulebooks and "writing", too much work.... Kids these days.
Well, I tend to disagree and continue to play D&D for years exactly for the opposite reasons you would stop.
I'm 37, I have several hobbies, a time consumming job and a nice family that I want to spend time with. My gaming time is short and I want to spent this time actually playing and not writing down/copying texts and calculating bonus and mods for every action. But I still want to play D&D because I love the system mechanic, the settings, the feeling of it, the community, the tools etc.
My friends and fellow gamers are in the same situation. We play exclusively online with MapTool because overwise we won't be playing once a week but once a month or even less. MapTool offers us the possibilty of automating a good number of calculations and save/reload between sessions, a good looking battlemap with light and vision handling etc.
You could say I want to play a videogame but that's not true as no videogame gives us the same amount of freedom (the GM still rules ;) ), imagination and roleplaying opportunities.
So, my point is, I hope D&D5 will be a total package with rulebooks, paper and electronic form, database for powers and monsters and equipment etc., software tools to speed up prep time and most of all, a cool VTT to import and handles PCs and NPCs and maps and combats and dice rolling etc.
D&D4 could have been that but since the electronic table seems to be vaporware, I'll wait for the next round ;)
I can foresee one coming, I do not see me buying it.
Will there be one? For sure.
Which actually sort of makes me sad. I will give it an honest open minded look when it arrives. But if it can't offer something to me that I think is hands down better than 4e, I won't invest in it. Which will be hard. I honestly think 4e is the best thing sliced since bread. Due to the amount of money I have already invested in it, and the amount I plan to continue to invest in it, 5e will have to be unbelievably amazing for me to even think about following it. I'm more likely to grognard it out for one edition with 4e, then invest in 6th or 7th edition (if I like the direction the game has gone in).
If WotC is smart, what they will do is they will oscillate which crowd they are attempting to appeal to with any given edition. 5e will appeal to simulationists. 6e to gamists/narrativists. And so on, and so forth. That way, 5e won't appeal to players like me. But, chances are, players like me won't be ready for a new edition when it comes anyway. We will be too attached to 4e. Then, when 6e rolls around, the people who are too attached to 5e will have to suck it up for an edition. However, people like me, who sat it out through 5e, could really get into 6th.
At least, I think that would probably be a good idea. It also seems to sort of be what happened with me and 2e/3e. I loved 2e. I gave 3e an honest try. At first I liked it. Pretty soon into it I decided that I actually really didn't like 3e D&D (though I did like d20 Modern and Monte Cooks World of Darkness) and didn't buy very many 3e books (after coming to that decision). Now with 4e I am all gung ho about D&D again.
Yeah, there will be a 5e. I'm guessing somewhere between 3 and 5 years from now, as that's about where I see the PHB series running out of interesting new ground to cover.
Frankly, there's several issues with the underlying 4e mechanics that could be touched up, even if we don't see any changes in design philosophy. Monster hit point and defence progressions, issues with the to-hit math, particularly for implements, etc. Things they've been patching with feats, unfortunatly. And that's before we consider the non-combat encounter rules and the problems with the math on skill checks, particularly that by paragon levels there is no skill DC that will pose any challenge at all to a specialist while still being even remotely possible for a non-specialist. These kinds of basic math and system problems were to be expected, given how completely 4e changed the game.
The main question is whether the inevitable 5e will be largely consistant with the design philosophy of 4e, or whether they'll take the opportunity to go in a new direction. And that can't even be guessed at for another couple years.
If WotC is smart, what they will do is they will oscillate which crowd they are attempting to appeal to with any given edition. 5e will appeal to simulationists. 6e to gamists/narrativists. And so on, and so forth. That way, 5e won't appeal to players like me. But, chances are, players like me won't be ready for a new edition when it comes anyway. We will be too attached to 4e. Then, when 6e rolls around, the people who are too attached to 5e will have to suck it up for an edition. However, people like me, who sat it out through 5e, could really get into 6th.
At least, I think that would probably be a good idea. It also seems to sort of be what happened with me and 2e/3e. I loved 2e. I gave 3e an honest try. At first I liked it. Pretty soon into it I decided that I actually really didn't like 3e D&D (though I did like d20 Modern and Monte Cooks World of Darkness) and didn't buy very many 3e books (after coming to that decision). Now with 4e I am all gung ho about D&D again.
Your analysis is borne out in my own personal experience. I played 1st edition Advanced Dungeons and Dragons. When 2nd edition came out, my friends and I all expressed bemusement and carried on. 3rd edition completely slipped by. But 4th edition has entirely revived my interest in Dungeons and Dragons.
I don't think there will be a 5e until there is a reason to make something that is as different from 4e as 4e was from 3e. As others have said, culture and games will move forward and at some point D&D will have to make a leap and catch up.
The question really is, how long will 4e stay relevant?
I would expect it to have at least five good years left in it, possibly many more. But you never know what's coming.
There will definitely be a 5E, and it will definitely include still better integration of technology.
Will D&D ever stop being a tabletop game? I doubt it. However, just because tabletop and electronic formats are mutually exclusive today doesn't mean that they will be forever. The writing is on the wall.
If you can evolve, then you dont have to die.
If D&D 4e can keep updating errata to stay current, then it wont 'run its course'. There wont be a need to break into a new edition.
That said, if D&D 4e became outmoded, by that time, the next 'edition' would be virtual reality. Totally different anyway.
The writing is on the wall.
Or eventually, on your dining room table sized tablet pc!
There will definitely be a 5E, and it will definitely include still better integration of technology.
Will D&D ever stop being a tabletop game? I doubt it. However, just because tabletop and electronic formats are mutually exclusive today doesn't mean that they will be forever. The writing is on the wall.
Wotc sees 4th edition as having a ten year life span so we've got plenty of time till fifth edition hits the street and I don't think the change over to 5 ED will be nearly as drastic as the change over from 3.5 to 4th ED was.
The writing is on the wall.
Or eventually, on your dining room table sized tablet pc!
This, ftw.
Just a matter of time.
My guess is that 5E will pretty much be software with subscription for both multi-user classic DM mode and DM-less mode (auto-playing adventures) supporting the above technology. Books available to order for collectors or info can be printed out from software for pnp play
I lean towards a digital 5e myself. But maybe for different reasons.
There's a fundamental limitation on all pen-and-paper games: complexity. If a game's rules are too complicated or hard-to-understand (like, arguably, OD&D) then people will simply houserule something simpler. Which is fine, but then you're not really playing the game as intended.
I think 3x and 4e both really pushed the limit on how complex a pen-and-paper game could be. Sometimes, you could argue, they broke that limit. Can anyone but true experts really play 3.5 with all its splats as intended?
A digital edition could solve that problem. Complexity doesn't matter if you've got a computer program to do the work for you.
We can all think of really cool rules that would make to-hits more satisfying, or armor and weapons more realistic, or whatever. The classic example is doing away with hitpoints and having actual injuries and so forth. But all of these things add tons of complexity to the game and really slow it down. Which is why they've never made it into the core rules.
Well hey, guess what. Your iPod can lookup a table in a matter of microseconds. It can do hundreds of dice rolls faster than you can blink. It can accurately track conditional bonuses and penalties until the kobolds come home.
I guess I wouldn't be at all surprised if 5e was directly tied to some kind of app that did all these sorts of things, even if there wasn't some all-consuming Virtual Tabletop to go along with it.
This, ftw.
That's incredible.
I love the future.
And, yes, 5E could go digital. Then the trolls could call it an MMO and mean it... 
This, ftw.
That's incredible.I love the future.
And, yes, 5E could go digital. Then the trolls could call it an MMO and mean it...
The Rules for 5th Edition will be printed on randomized cards, included in the random booster packs of D&D 5th ed Mini's. On average, you will have to purchase 2 cases of minis to get a full set of rules.
Also under 5th edition, all combat will be resolved using proprietary dice with symbols rather than numbers. These dice will also be randomly included in the mini boosters. Different power sources will use different dice.
Under 5th edition rules, US medical care will be limited to people under the age of 60.
Wait, sorry, wrong factoids.
Under Obama-Care, there will be 27 playable races, all of them sub-races of elves.
Wait, these cards are all mixed up now... Dang... Something about Halflings causing global warming? Crud... Well, I've got to go organize my conspiracy theories, I'll be back later to pronounce doom.
This, ftw.
That's incredible.I love the future.
And, yes, 5E could go digital. Then the trolls could call it an MMO and mean it...
The Rules for 5th Edition will be printed on randomized cards, included in the random booster packs of D&D 5th ed Mini's. On average, you will have to purchase 2 cases of minis to get a full set of rules.
Also under 5th edition, all combat will be resolved using proprietary dice with symbols rather than numbers. These dice will also be randomly included in the mini boosters. Different power sources will use different dice.
Under 5th edition rules, US medical care will be limited to people under the age of 60.
Wait, sorry, wrong factoids.
Under Obama-Care, there will be 27 playable races, all of them sub-races of elves.
Wait, these cards are all mixed up now... Dang... Something about Halflings causing global warming? Crud... Well, I've got to go organize my conspiracy theories, I'll be back later to pronounce doom.
This post for the loose.
This post for the loose.
Operating under the assumption that he was being facetious, I found it amusing. Were my assumption to be inaccurate, I would be inclined to agree.
If I failed to read irony into his post, which he intended to be present, then either a) his post for the loose, but for a totally different reason than I stated in my last post or b) my reading skills for the loose, for failing to understand the intent of his post.
I prefer to pick a, as that does not indicate a failing on my part.
This, ftw. Just a matter of time.My guess is that 5E will pretty much be software with subscription for both multi-user classic DM mode and DM-less mode (auto-playing adventures) supporting the above technology. Books available to order for collectors or info can be printed out from software for pnp play
I will start saving this minute for one of those! But it has to be protected against spilled drinks.
This, ftw.
That's incredible.I love the future.
And, yes, 5E could go digital. Then the trolls could call it an MMO and mean it...
The Rules for 5th Edition will be printed on randomized cards, included in the random booster packs of D&D 5th ed Mini's. On average, you will have to purchase 2 cases of minis to get a full set of rules.
Also under 5th edition, all combat will be resolved using proprietary dice with symbols rather than numbers. These dice will also be randomly included in the mini boosters. Different power sources will use different dice.
Under 5th edition rules, US medical care will be limited to people under the age of 60.
Wait, sorry, wrong factoids.
Under Obama-Care, there will be 27 playable races, all of them sub-races of elves.
Wait, these cards are all mixed up now... Dang... Something about Halflings causing global warming? Crud... Well, I've got to go organize my conspiracy theories, I'll be back later to pronounce doom.
This post for the loose.
'Lose'. And I agree.
i can't wait for fifth edition. i keep buying the books, hoping i'll finally see something that revives the sense of wonder and excitement i used to have with almost every 2nd and 3rd ed book, but so far, not one has. i'm so bored!
by that time, the next 'edition' would be virtual reality. Totally different anyway.
The writing is on the wall.
Or eventually, on your dining room table sized tablet pc!
I think you guys just gave me a geekgasm with these ideas.
i can't wait for fifth edition. i keep buying the books, hoping i'll finally see something that revives the sense of wonder and excitement i used to have with almost every 2nd and 3rd ed book, but so far, not one has. i'm so bored!
You know I'm pretty sure that a sense of wonder has nothing to do with books. You might want to take a look in the mirror!
If I failed to read irony into his post, which he intended to be present, then either a) his post for the loose, but for a totally different reason than I stated in my last post or b) my reading skills for the loose, for failing to understand the intent of his post.
I prefer to pick a, as that does not indicate a failing on my part.
Sense of humor and understanding of satire fail, good sir. Also, Lose, not loose.
Also, Not my finest work either, so, yeah.
I tend to see these threads as being roughly 40% "The next edition will be awesome, because it will fix everything wrong with this edition, mainly by scrapping the last 30 years and going back to 1st edition rules"; 40% "The next edition will absolutely ruin the game which is Perfect Right Now and here's all the bat $%*! crazy things I expect them to do"; and 20% people telling each other they're stupid.
The truth is, 5th edition will change the rules as much as 3.X changed them from 2nd, and 4e changed them from 3.X. We won't know what to expect until they start testing things near the end of 4e's run, which is 8 years off at the closest, regardless of whatever faulty logic strawman arguments people want to make about the time between 3.0 and 3.5, because that wasn't an edition change, so shut up about it already.
A lot of us saw the move towards endless powers at the end of 3.X. People looked at Warlock and The Book of the Nine Swords, and the Shadow Casters in Tome of Magic, and saw that the new ideas were all about NOT running out of powers, ever. And a lot of us predicted that would be a big part of the next edition.
So, what I'm saying here is, Round about 2015, start looking really hard at the things they're doing differently then they did in the first three years. But they're still dedicated to this edition right now. They aren't testing new ideas, they're incorporating them.
So, in conclusion, I view these threads as being both pointless and divisive. I responded to it in the manner I thought most appropriate, namely facetious satirical derision.
Oh, and I expect we will see D&D type RPGs go fully virtual, using a touch table PC and eBooks/Software instead of dead trees just shortly after we get our flying cars, FTL personal spaceships, and matter replicators. Just saying.
*snip*
*applauds*
If you can evolve, then you dont have to die.
If D&D 4e can keep updating errata to stay current, then it wont 'run its course'. There wont be a need to break into a new edition.
That said, if D&D 4e became outmoded, by that time, the next 'edition' would be virtual reality. Totally different anyway.
I'm sorta with you. When I said I believe there will be a 5E, what I really meant was that I definitely can imagine a new edition or subedition beyond what 4E is currently. Whether or not we call it 5E, or 4.5E, or 4E Revised, I believe it's inevitable, because a print product can't be "patched" or errata'd indefinitely without eventually ceasing to bear any relation to the original.
More specifically, I definitely think we'll both a Revised 4E released around 2012, and a 5E released around 2017. Why a revision? Because after four or five years, the core books will be pretty old, and lots of stuff will have been updated; folks will be looking to replace well-worn PHs, and they might as well buy a newer, more relevant version of it if it's available, right? Plus, every edition thus far has had a revision.
The writing is on the wall.
Or eventually, on your dining room table sized tablet pc!
That's actually exactly what I was thinking of! D&D is still gonna be played together with friends around a table, but technology will be a seamless part of it. Think "high-tech corporate boardroom" rather than "LAN party".
Also, thanks to whoever posted that cool video! Hopefully the microsoft factor won't hinder that otherwise very cool product. Between this table and Google Wave, the near-future of digital gaming looks very promising!
There will definitely be a 5E, and it will definitely include still better integration of technology.
Will D&D ever stop being a tabletop game? I doubt it. However, just because tabletop and electronic formats are mutually exclusive today doesn't mean that they will be forever. The writing is on the wall.
Wotc sees 4th edition as having a ten year life span so we've got plenty of time till fifth edition hits the street and I don't think the change over to 5 ED will be nearly as drastic as the change over from 3.5 to 4th ED was.
I tend to agree. Like I said above, I do think we'll see new editions, but I don't think they'll be very soon. I also agree that the next edition update won't change as much as the last one did, but that doesn't mean the changes won't be significant.
Personally, I think more about the format of the next edition than I do about the rules. I definitely think we'll see even better integration of digital tools and devices in 5E, but as for the electronic table discussed above, I don't think that technology will be ubiquitous enough by the time 5E comes out. As much as I think that's almost an ideal format for D&D, I don't think many people are going to own a coffee table computer until they only cost about $1000. Thus, we'll be waiting a while.
This, ftw.
That's incredible.I love the future.
And, yes, 5E could go digital. Then the trolls could call it an MMO and mean it...
The Rules for 5th Edition will be printed on randomized cards, included in the random booster packs of D&D 5th ed Mini's. On average, you will have to purchase 2 cases of minis to get a full set of rules.
Also under 5th edition, all combat will be resolved using proprietary dice with symbols rather than numbers. These dice will also be randomly included in the mini boosters. Different power sources will use different dice.
Under 5th edition rules, US medical care will be limited to people under the age of 60.
Wait, sorry, wrong factoids.
Under Obama-Care, there will be 27 playable races, all of them sub-races of elves.
Wait, these cards are all mixed up now... Dang... Something about Halflings causing global warming? Crud... Well, I've got to go organize my conspiracy theories, I'll be back later to pronounce doom.
This post for the loose.
'Lose'. And I agree.
Hahaha. It seems that my reading skills for the lose as well.
@Doc - I dunno, man. Assuming your guesstimate of 5e releasing in 2017 is correct...that's more than seven years from now. Given the rate at which technology improves and prices drop, I think $1,000 would be an entirely plausible pricepoint by then. I mean, I spent $2,350 less on my new laptop than I did for my 2004 laptop. And it's about three times better in every measurement. =D
@Dave - *patpat* It'll be okay! I've ordered you Hooked on Phonics Psionics!
@Doc - I dunno, man. Assuming your guesstimate of 5e releasing in 2017 is correct...that's more than seven years from now. Given the rate at which technology improves and prices drop, I think $1,000 would be an entirely plausible pricepoint by then. I mean, I spent $2,350 less on my new laptop than I did for my 2004 laptop. And it's about three times better in every measurement. =D
I like your scenario better.
What makes it even worse is the fact that I am an English MA, one with a very high GPA. 
Well, I'm off to go hang my head in shame now.
Microsofts table pc. I see the problems already...
Oops, I spilled my drink.
Ouch, my neck hurts.
Hey doc, why am I developing a hunched back?
Dude, the dog jumped up on my table pc and cracked it!
Damn finger prints!
Ouch, my neck really hurts!
The kids were wrestling and fell on the pc again...
I have to have surgery on my neck...
Ouch, now my shoulders hurt.
Ah, I can't wait. Also, 5e being 100% digital would be a very bad idea for wotc, as a good majority of D&D players are NOT DDI subscribers or participants on this site. Also, you probably wouldn't be able to download anything, since you could wait three years, get a months subscription and then own everything made for 5e and cancel the subscription. Which means when the subscription ran out, you could no longer play 5e.
Pay to play FTW!!!
/sarcasm.
There is no reason the table could not be of normal height: that is just some more cheap wood tacked on the bottom. My only dread is the cost of a full sized gaming table version of the screen.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4KZRQjCMOA
2:10 onwards - That would be cool for 5E D&D 
There is no reason the table could not be of normal height: that is just some more cheap wood tacked on the bottom. My only dread is the cost of a full sized gaming table version of the screen.
lol, I'll stick with the books, a home pc and a laptop at the most. Then again, I'm not addicted to gadgets.
"ooo! You can use the computer to do this now! Its so much better now that its digital! I can't wait til I can email my pee to the toilet and fax my food to my gut! You old people who have oldschool sex are lame! We just tweet now! It feels better and you don't sweat as much!"
Bah!
I don't know why people automatically assume that they'll need some kind of electronic tabletop. I think it's more likely that 5e will just have a lot of tools that work with your iPhone and stuff.
"ooo! You can use the computer to do this now! Its so much better now that its digital! I can't wait til I can email my pee to the toilet and fax my food to my gut! You old people who have oldschool sex are lame! We just tweet now! It feels better and you don't sweat as much!"
It's not very often someone on these boards gets to use the term "Strawman" and be using the word correctly so I relish this moment.
"ooo! You can use the computer to do this now! Its so much better now that its digital! I can't wait til I can email my pee to the toilet and fax my food to my gut! You old people who have oldschool sex are lame! We just tweet now! It feels better and you don't sweat as much!"It's not very often someone on these boards gets to use the term "Strawman" and be using the word correctly so I relish this moment.
"ooo! You can use the computer to do this now! Its so much better now that its digital! I can't wait til I can email my pee to the toilet and fax my food to my gut! You old people who have oldschool sex are lame! We just tweet now! It feels better and you don't sweat as much!"It's not very often someone on these boards gets to use the term "Strawman" and be using the word correctly so I relish this moment.
Um, how an obviously extreme example not meant to argue how electronic gaming is inferior in anyway can be called a strawman tactic is beyond me. Pointing out a trend bordering on addiction isn't "strawman" what so ever.
But I guess this forum has its own standards.
Watch and wait for a book that totally throws the mechanics for a loop. In 3e it was Book of Nine Swords. That was basically a precursor for 4e (the Devs mentioned in an interview it was like a test run for 4e).
It happened way before Tome of Battle!
Most of the things in the Complete series were little 4e play tests. Daily and encounter powers started appearing very early on.
Tome of Battle is just easier to remember, as it had many more levels of blatantly new mechanics. But the 4e playtests happened much earlier.
I think there is a strong possibility that there won't be a 5e. As much as I love and will always love the game... looking at Hasbro's annual reports, I don't think D&D is much of a financial asset to the company. I can very easily see the product line being discontinued, and Hasbro not selling the rights to anyone else. 
I think there is a strong possibility that there won't be a 5e. As much as I love and will always love the game... looking at Hasbro's annual reports, I don't think D&D is much of a financial asset to the company. I can very easily see the product line being discontinued, and Hasbro not selling the rights to anyone else.
There's also the option of WotC licensing the D&D brand name to another rpg company, such as Paizo, Mongoose, White Wolf, etc ...
As long as D&D is around, there will always be people who believe that it could be done better or differently - no matter who owns the rights. 5e will happen, I just don't see it happening anytime in the near future - 4e is too big right now to kill off.
not meant to argue how electronic gaming is inferior in anyway
Then what was the point of the post?
Pointing out a trend bordering on addiction
What on earth are you talking about here?
Um, how an obviously extreme example not meant to argue how electronic gaming is inferior in anyway can be called a strawman tactic is beyond me. Pointing out a trend bordering on addiction isn't "strawman" what so ever.But I guess this forum has its own standards.
Let me break it down for you a little. Those things that were mentioned. You know, the ones that I quoted. Yeah, nobody is proposing those things. Not Wired Magazine; not raving X-Box fanboys; and not Microsoft, IBM or Apple. It is a fact that this argument was constructed, by the poster, to make a point. It is the very definition of a straw man.
But, of course, now I'm curious. What's your definition of a strawman if not a rediculous argument that was constructed for the other side in order to be torn apart? I'd like to know now.
not meant to argue how electronic gaming is inferior in anyway
Then what was the point of the post?Pointing out a trend bordering on addiction
What on earth are you talking about here?
The point of the post was lost, I guess. It was called sarcasm.
As for what I mean about addiction to electronic doodads, well, I mean just that. People are addicted to the latest tech. More and more every year. Instead of explaining my point, just research electronic addiction, internet addiction, video game addiction, consumer addiction and other addictions that fit the bill.
Um, how an obviously extreme example not meant to argue how electronic gaming is inferior in anyway can be called a strawman tactic is beyond me. Pointing out a trend bordering on addiction isn't "strawman" what so ever.But I guess this forum has its own standards.
Let me break it down for you a little. Those things that were mentioned. You know, the ones that I quoted. Yeah, nobody is proposing those things. Not Wired Magazine; not raving X-Box fanboys; and not Microsoft, IBM or Apple. It is a fact that this argument was constructed, by the poster, to make a point. It is the very definition of a straw man.
But, of course, now I'm curious. What's your definition of a strawman if not a rediculous argument that was constructed for the other side in order to be torn apart? I'd like to know now.
The part you quoted was not in anyway me arguing, it was pure sarcasm.
Also, my definition of a strawman is exactly what the definition is. I'll use wiki since everyone seems to be a fan of that site.
"
A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2]
Presenting and refuting a weakened form of an opponent's argument can be a part of a valid argument. For example, one can argue that the opposing position implies that at least one other statement - being presumably easier to refute than the original position - must be true. If one refutes this weaker proposition, the refutation is valid and does not fit the above definition of a "straw man" argument.
There is a difference between a strawman argument and sarcasm. I posted a sarcastic example and it was "labeled" something else, since people need to label things. Plus, I never "refuted" anything in the post you quoted, as I never claimed or implied that anything was false or incorrect. Only that I believe it to be ridiculous. Because thats what it is. 5e being all digital/online only, is absurd and would be a huge mistake, one I highly doubt wotc would make.
The point of the post was lost, I guess. It was called sarcasm.
Perhaps you should avoid this in the future. You aren't very good at it.
*blah blah, do my work for me, blah*
Yeah...no. If you want to try and make a lame and irrelevent point about 'electronics addiction', don't expect everyone else to do the legwork themselves. >.>
I don't know why people automatically assume that they'll need some kind of electronic tabletop. I think it's more likely that 5e will just have a lot of tools that work with your iPhone and stuff.
Who's assuming? We're saying that technology will be even more integrated into D&D in the future, and that an electronic tabletop would be one example of an ideal technology for D&D. That doesn't mean we think these things are either inevitable or imminent.
I think there is a strong possibility that there won't be a 5e. As much as I love and will always love the game... looking at Hasbro's annual reports, I don't think D&D is much of a financial asset to the company. I can very easily see the product line being discontinued, and Hasbro not selling the rights to anyone else.
Pessimistic, much? In many people, there's a "strong possibility" of sudden, unexpected death caused by a blood clot in the brain, but you're not talking about that...
I think there is a strong possibility that there won't be a 5e. As much as I love and will always love the game... looking at Hasbro's annual reports, I don't think D&D is much of a financial asset to the company. I can very easily see the product line being discontinued, and Hasbro not selling the rights to anyone else.
I checked out the 2008 annual report. My eyes glazed over after about twenty pages, so I will have to rely upon the analysis of someone else.
Does WoTC actually lose money for Hasbro? If not, I cannot see any reason to drop it.
Furthermore, I did read in Hasbro's report that it recognizes that many of its products are fad-based and children-oriented. There is a fear that as children turn to video games, Hasbro's strongest sources of revenue will be diminished. In that case, I can see that a mature, fan-based niche product might be attractive, at least to bolster revenues in any small way.
(Maybe someone ought to buy a few shares of Hasbro and ask a question about WoTC at the annual meeting.)
I don't know why people automatically assume that they'll need some kind of electronic tabletop. I think it's more likely that 5e will just have a lot of tools that work with your iPhone and stuff.
Who's assuming? We're saying that technology will be even more integrated into D&D in the future, and that an electronic tabletop would be one example of an ideal technology for D&D. That doesn't mean we think these things are either inevitable or imminent.I think there is a strong possibility that there won't be a 5e. As much as I love and will always love the game... looking at Hasbro's annual reports, I don't think D&D is much of a financial asset to the company. I can very easily see the product line being discontinued, and Hasbro not selling the rights to anyone else.
Pessimistic, much? In many people, there's a "strong possibility" of sudden, unexpected death caused by a blood clot in the brain, but you're not talking about that...
Why would I talk about brain blood clots unless this was a thread about strokes?? Your logic is a bit fallacious.
I'm just saying, I had to do an extensive term paper on Hasbro and Mattel for one of my MBA courses, and D&D is obviously not considered a very important line by Hasbro if you read the ARs for the last four years (of course, good luck with that. Whoever organizes Hasbro's annual reports should be drawn and quartered). ALOT of people in the D&D department have been let go, and the myriad of other failures with D&D insider, E-copies, and other promised contents does not inspire optimism. A certain prominent Ex-WotC executive has even referred to it as the "tell-tale signs of [D&D]'s death throes", which was in extremely poor taste on his part, but may be true.
I'm not saying there is no way that there will be a 5e. I'm just saying don't rule out 4e being the last edition.
I think there is a strong possibility that there won't be a 5e. As much as I love and will always love the game... looking at Hasbro's annual reports, I don't think D&D is much of a financial asset to the company. I can very easily see the product line being discontinued, and Hasbro not selling the rights to anyone else.
I checked out the 2008 annual report. My eyes glazed over after about twenty pages, so I will have to rely upon the analysis of someone else.
Does WoTC actually lose money for Hasbro? If not, I cannot see any reason to drop it.
Furthermore, I did read in Hasbro's report that it recognizes that many of its products are fad-based and children-oriented. There is a fear that as children turn to video games, Hasbro's strongest sources of revenue will be diminished. In that case, I can see that a mature, fan-based niche product might be attractive, at least to bolster revenues in any small way.
WotC doesn't lose money for Hasbro. Magic the Gathering continues to be fairly profittable. I highly doubt that Hasbro would drop WotC. I'm saying that Hasbro could force WotC to drop the D&D product line. I'm not saying it will, I was just pointing out that it wouldn't come as a total surprise to me (as much as it would bum me out).
Why would Hasbro even consider forcing WotC to drop their line of D&D products, 4e has been on the best-sellers list a number of times already, as well as won 6 awards at this years Gen Con RPG Awards including Product Of The Year. 4e being the last edition? I don't see it - but if the rumors were true, it would be because of corporate bullsh!t; another company would pick it right back up and release a 5e. I've seen it happen with TSR. Regardless, D&D is here to stay and will continue to evolve into whatever direction technology deems it possible. I, personally, prefer the style of pen & paper, but not everybody rolls that way.
Instead of explaining my point, just research electronic addiction, internet addiction, video game addiction, consumer addiction and other addictions that fit the bill.
Sounds like you've got an addiction to classifying behaviours as addictions.
I do not like the iPhone. I do like the idea of an electronic gaming table. Someone liking the idea of a new technology does not equate to them having an addiction.
I, personally, prefer the style of pen & paper, but not everybody rolls that way.
Buh DUM - PISH!
I, personally, prefer the style of pen & paper, but not everybody rolls that way.
Buh DUM - PISH!
I've been waiting for this moment my entire life.
Instead of explaining my point, just research electronic addiction, internet addiction, video game addiction, consumer addiction and other addictions that fit the bill.
Sounds like you've got an addiction to classifying behaviours as addictions.I do not like the iPhone. I do like the idea of an electronic gaming table. Someone liking the idea of a new technology does not equate to them having an addiction.
So providing examples in a single reply leads to you believing I'v an addiction. Ok. Just do some research on the subjects and you'll see that electronic addiction is very real and very common.
Alittle bit of reading on the subject can go a long way. Many D&D gamers are already dependant on electronic tools and aids to the point that doing the work by hand on paper seems absurd to them, as if its somehow inferior.
Also, I never said that everyone who likes electronic aids are addicts, but plenty of people addicted to electronics don't even know it and flat out deny it. (looking at you MMORPG players, lol.)
You can also be addicted to one aspect but dislike the other. Someone can be addicted to texting on a cellphone, but have no interest in playing video games on it, or listening to music on it.
So players can be addicted to using the character builder, refusing to build characters without it, but have no interest in the monster builder.
Hell, I'v heard of some people being addicted to play by post D&D while having no interest in playing D&D in person.
Addiction is a multi headed hydra.
Sounds to me like a couple of people are addicted to their diplomacy skills about addictions.
So providing examples in a single reply leads to you believing I'v an addiction.
Its about as absurd as the reply I was posting to.
lol, I'll stick with the books, a home pc and a laptop at the most. Then again, I'm not addicted to gadgets.
"ooo! You can use the computer to do this now! Its so much better now that its digital! I can't wait til I can email my pee to the toilet and fax my food to my gut! You old people who have oldschool sex are lame! We just tweet now! It feels better and you don't sweat as much!"
Bah!
This post not intimates that you're superior to everyone else. But those posting interest in this thread are addicted to electronics. Your implication of people suffering from electronic addiction is as absurd as my assertion you're addicted to classifying addictions.
Also stop telling people to prove your point. I can say "The earth is flat. Its a serious problem for naval safety. If you don't believe me, look it up." Its not a valid discussion technique.
So providing examples in a single reply leads to you believing I'v an addiction.
Its about as absurd as the reply I was posting to.If you say so.
lol, I'll stick with the books, a home pc and a laptop at the most. Then again, I'm not addicted to gadgets.
"ooo! You can use the computer to do this now! Its so much better now that its digital! I can't wait til I can email my pee to the toilet and fax my food to my gut! You old people who have oldschool sex are lame! We just tweet now! It feels better and you don't sweat as much!"
Bah!
This post not intimates that you're superior to everyone else. But those posting interest in this thread are addicted to electronics. Your implication of people suffering from electronic addiction is as absurd as my assertion you're addicted to classifying addictions.Also stop telling people to prove your point. I can say "The earth is flat. Its a serious problem for naval safety. If you don't believe me, look it up." Its not a valid discussion technique.
lol. I'm not telling people to prove anything. If they want to know, just read up on it, otherwise, forget it. No worries either way. I don't think its anything to get worked up over and getting bossy won't change anything I do, except maybe provoke more lol's from me than usual.
lol. Bolded parts are mine.
I lean towards a digital 5e myself. But maybe for different reasons.
There's a fundamental limitation on all pen-and-paper games: complexity. If a game's rules are too complicated or hard-to-understand (like, arguably, OD&D) then people will simply houserule something simpler. Which is fine, but then you're not really playing the game as intended.
A digital edition could solve that problem. Complexity doesn't matter if you've got a computer program to do the work for you.
I'd disagree; I think that keeping the rules lean still matters, even when it's a computer game. I'm pretty sure it's more satisfying to play a game when everyone feels that they know the rules, and that's easier when they're not bloated.
I lean towards a digital 5e myself. But maybe for different reasons.
There's a fundamental limitation on all pen-and-paper games: complexity. If a game's rules are too complicated or hard-to-understand (like, arguably, OD&D) then people will simply houserule something simpler. Which is fine, but then you're not really playing the game as intended.
A digital edition could solve that problem. Complexity doesn't matter if you've got a computer program to do the work for you.
I'd disagree; I think that keeping the rules lean still matters, even when it's a computer game. I'm pretty sure it's more satisfying to play a game when everyone feels that they know the rules, and that's easier when they're not bloated.
The complexity of it all is part of what makes the game what it is - challenging, which is exactly what it was originally intended to do in the first place, make people think. Digital, IMO, would only put limitations on the game, for instance - it would force people to play exactly the same way, and not everybody shares the same style and tastes. Keep in mind one thing here - back when D&D was created, computers weren't your average household item, so no one at that time figured that 35 years later, something else might be doing all the work for players when it came time to roll the dice. To me, that just takes some of the fun out of it.
Sarcasm, hyperbole and straw man arguments are not mutually exlusive. I understand your point and I think it's worthless because you have to use extreme hyperbole to prove it.
Is there such a thing as electronic addiction? Maybe. Does that mean there are people who think we should replace basic bodily functions with digital equivalents? No. That was my point. Once again, I understand hyperbole. I think it's a weak form of argument.
And if you were attempting sarcasm, you really need to figure it out. That stuff is dangerous.
And if you were attempting sarcasm, you really need to figure it out. That stuff is dangerous.
Srsly. I knew a kid once who put his eye out.
I'd disagree; I think that keeping the rules lean still matters, even when it's a computer game.
Having been involved in a Roleplaying Intensive Online Game, the players actually wanted more and more complex rules to increase the realism.
Despite common wisdom that 4th ed is like a video game because its rules are simpler and less simulationist. My experience has been roleplayers enjoy a complex and simulationist game, when the burden isn't on them to compute the rules necessary to simulate an internally consistent and realistic world.
Keeping it simple from a player and DM perspective doesn't mean it needs to be simple rules.
As someone whose a big proponent of simple rules you can ignore when you're roleplaying, I would prefer simulationist rules if D&D were to go digital and have a computer calculate all the rules. But then again my experience is with playing with people who don't want to be able to optimise characters through rules, but simply play realistic characters through rules.
My prediction is that 5th ed will do away with alingments or that D&D is at least headed in that direction.
> by Hasbro
That's always been true. The folks who worked on 3.0E talked about this subject years ago. That doesn't mean that Hasbro is going to arbitrarily kill it; it's just not a big enough (or splash-making enough) product line to be worth spending a lot of time talking about in the reports.
That said, SKR specifically pointed out that while D&D wasn't a big moneymaker, it was a fairly steady moneymaker, and even the most beany of bean counters at Hasbro recognized the value of such an asset.
Sarcasm, hyperbole and straw man arguments are not mutually exlusive. I understand your point and I think it's worthless because you have to use extreme hyperbole to prove it.
Is there such a thing as electronic addiction? Maybe. Does that mean there are people who think we should replace basic bodily functions with digital equivalents? No. That was my point. Once again, I understand hyperbole. I think it's a weak form of argument.
And if you were attempting sarcasm, you really need to figure it out. That stuff is dangerous.
You're way too sensitive about it. The whole "email and fax bodily liquids" is from a tv show (ATHF) but you and everyone else don't seem to know the show, so you didn't understand the sarcastic joke.
Just calm down and let it go.
I would more than welcome a more digital geared version of D&D with a interface program that would allow the DM and the players to interact quickly and making the maths for them should they decide it, kinda like it was presented on the 4th ED presentation videos. Besides that you would be able to use rules to play on old paper and pencil style if desired, I, for one, welcome technology integration for it's practicality. It would make knowing other people that wants to play and connectivity to them easier. Besides that they have to follow the trends on the gaming industry to stay alive, what wuld make more money for them.
Having been involved in a Roleplaying Intensive Online Game, the players actually wanted more and more complex rules to increase the realism.Despite common wisdom that 4th ed is like a video game because its rules are simpler and less simulationist. My experience has been roleplayers enjoy a complex and simulationist game, when the burden isn't on them to compute the rules necessary to simulate an internally consistent and realistic world.
Keeping it simple from a player and DM perspective doesn't mean it needs to be simple rules.
As someone whose a big proponent of simple rules you can ignore when you're roleplaying, I would prefer simulationist rules if D&D were to go digital and have a computer calculate all the rules. But then again my experience is with playing with people who don't want to be able to optimise characters through rules, but simply play realistic characters through rules.
Really it all depends on the players. I oprefer a leaner ruleset where the DM can adjudicate hwo things happen in the world. When the rules start getting simulationist the DM almost has to start saying noto the players because the rules say something can't happen.
Now maybe it's just me, but when I am playing heroic fantasy I don't want things to hamstring myself or other players from weaving a good story. Then again, to me, the idea of a realistic character is a bit of an oxymoron with magic in the setting.
I like a good story but I hate when people use it as an excuse to ignore abilities of my PC. It makes me feel like, "Gee why did I pick this feat/power/ect if it's just going to be ignored?"
Just calm down and let it go.
Irony itq.
Fear not, netizen. I'm calm and resonable.
I like a good story but I hate when people use it as an excuse to ignore abilities of my PC. It makes me feel like, "Gee why did I pick this feat/power/ect if it's just going to be ignored?"
This.
I once played in a very ... imaginative (some would say Monty Haul) and mercifully short-lived campaign in which I was fortunate enough to tickle the dungeon master's imagination. I would suggest cool ideas, and sooner than later these would be fulfilled. My poor friend on the other hand, had a magic-user/thief and was thinking by the book and reality: hard to match a paladin with a book of inifinte spells which always refreshed itself.
The sad thing is that happens a lot when narration takes over a fight. Then I am unable to use my powers or abilities that would have affected the fight. That is why I don't like diceless RP. It just turns into a DM telling me what happens instead of there being an element of chance. If they want that, why not write a book then? I needs my dice! (or cards or chops or whatever else is used to determine conflicts/skills.)
I'd disagree; I think that keeping the rules lean still matters, even when it's a computer game.
Having been involved in a Roleplaying Intensive Online Game, the players actually wanted more and more complex rules to increase the realism.Despite common wisdom that 4th ed is like a video game because its rules are simpler and less simulationist. My experience has been roleplayers enjoy a complex and simulationist game, when the burden isn't on them to compute the rules necessary to simulate an internally consistent and realistic world.
Keeping it simple from a player and DM perspective doesn't mean it needs to be simple rules.
As someone whose a big proponent of simple rules you can ignore when you're roleplaying, I would prefer simulationist rules if D&D were to go digital and have a computer calculate all the rules. But then again my experience is with playing with people who don't want to be able to optimise characters through rules, but simply play realistic characters through rules.
Yeah exactly. I think there is definitely a fine line. YES you want mechanics to stay understandable. 'Transparent' is a word that comes to mind. I always liked that about the Neverwinter Nights games. Even though things moved quickly and everything was computed for you, you could pause at any moment and look through the log to see what the hell just happened. I think that's really the idea here.
The thing is, even simple additions to the rules can significantly slow down a game. Let's say we want to houserule it so that (FOR EXAMPLE) everyone re-rolls initiative every round. That's a simple enough thing to do, but you're going to find that it adds probably 10 minutes to every encounter. That's a pretty significant cost in terms of time.
There's nothing wrong with the idea of rolling init every round. It's not complicated to understand. Previous versions of D&D have even done it. It would be a very nice boost for players of rogues and rangers and anyone who had invested heavily in their init. There might be other advantages as well. But most people aren't going to do it if it slows down or complicates an already slow and complicated process!
Meanwhile, a simple handheld application could do this in miliseconds.
This is a simple example. I'll bet there's tons of rules people have come up with that never made it into the game because they slow things down too much or are too complicated to keep track of using a pen and paper.
And don't forget situational bonuses! It seems like people have a hard time remembering even the fairly basic ones that appear in 4e. Again, good digital tools could make tracking lots and lots of cool bonuses (or negatives) a breeze.
Really it all depends on the players.
3rd ed and 3.5e was simulationist. People complained because it was too hard and complex so they made it simple with 4th ed instead creating a ruleset that focuses on a narrative approach, often going against any realism or internal consistency. People complain now because it is unrealistic and stretches the boundaries of disbelief far too much.*
If 5th edition did become computer-based, then a way to please people in both groups (which are fairly polarised) would be to have complexity hidden by computers so you can present a simple ruleset to the players
Of course from what I've heard D&D has become simpler with each edition (3rd ed did away with Thaco, 4th ed did away with all constructs attempting to conform to a simulationist play method. Even 2nd ed was simpler than 1st ed from what I've heard). So for 5th ed to become more complex than 4th ed would be counter to that pattern.
But who knows. Anything's possible is really what I'm getting at.
* I'm attempting to put both editions in the worst light possible, as viewed by their detractors mainly to make a point. The point being 3rd ed and 4th ed are very different beasts and so fans of each system complain about the perceived advantages of the other system.
For those speaking about D&D on a touch surface... it's already coming...
For those speaking about D&D on a touch surface... it's already coming...
HOMINAHOMINAHOMINA.
For those speaking about D&D on a touch surface... it's already coming...
I can barely afford to keep a selection of Dungeon Tiles I like though.
Ah well, give it a few years, and (god and the economy willing) I'll have enough disposable income to snatch up anything that looks sufficiently awesome.
If we really wanna get technical, D&D is already on its 6th edition.
1. Dungeons & Dragon (the basics)
2. Advanced Dungeons & Dragons
3. AD&D 2nd Edition
4. 3E
5. 3.5
6. 4E
If we really wanna get technical, D&D is already on its 6th edition.
1. Dungeons & Dragon (the basics)
2. Advanced Dungeons & Dragons
3. AD&D 2nd Edition
4. 3E
5. 3.5
6. 4E
Well played sir.
Not to mention the later versions of the original (non-Advanced) D&D that ran parallel to AD&D for quite some time.
btw. I am now convinced that I need a Microsoft Surface. Even though I'm a Mac person. My home (non-laptop) shall be a Microsoft Surface. Even though I can't really afford one. I must needs have one.
More than a big microsoft surface I would expect lot of personal device that meet in one and let you take care of the number part of your character
think of e-reader/netbook/smartphone that get linked when you play
maybe one of this www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product... in an even smaller version for the common part....
that is if we don't get en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augmented_reality D&D
I mean why bother with screens when you can just have your character added to a virtual chessboard?
All of these technology ideas are perfectly doable with the current (and even past) rule set.
A really cool version of the D&D tabletop software could allow you to automatically connect and upload character data on the fly though. That way you can create your character at home on your desktop, transfer it to your phone/laptop/iPod touch/whatever and have it automatically upload at game time.
The DM could do the same with adventures/encounters/monsters.
Might as well just invent a new type of video game with dm abilities. Include isolated areas, detailed character creation and a map editor with monster builders and so on. So a dm can create a complete campaign and the players can create characters they want, you get the D&D flavor, you get the social interaction and you get the visuals along with audio.
Just make a game like final fantasy tactics or ogre battle or something similar with figs and grid rules, but include creation/judication rules for the DM. Basically that where this whole online/digital fad evolution is going anyways.
I wouldn't be against it either. I can still run old school games in person using older editions and I could run online games with friends and strangers (fill ins).
The idea of a final fantasy tactics/DND tactics playstyle game with a warcraft 3 world editior, better graphics and a DM function sounds neat. I'm still a fan of the "old" style of D&D, you know, meeting up in person and running a game with books and using paper for our character sheets, rolling dice. Might not be too long before that method of playing D&D is gone.
God, I feel old!
The idea of a final fantasy tactics/DND tactics playstyle game with a warcraft 3 world editior, better graphics and a DM function sounds neat. I'm still a fan of the "old" style of D&D, you know, meeting up in person and running a game with books and using paper for our character sheets, rolling dice. Might not be too long before that method of playing D&D is gone.
Nah, that method will never die. I agree with you that I like F2F, but when some folks you used to play with move aroudn the country, it's nice to be able to still play with them. Havign the technology to replace the game board a la the surface table in the video to use wihile playign F2F is a nice touch though. Then again I'm a certified tech junkie so...
I don't think D&D will be narrowed down to a certain playing element just because of technology, if anything - it'll continue to expand with the times, just as it always has, giving gamers more options. When TSR was considering closing its doors on D&D, alot of people believed that they'd seen the end, but in fact it turned out to be the first chapter into another world of gaming. With the release of 4E, the gaming industry is turning to other possibilities that can reach people with computer skills and bring the text based style of D&D to a more virtual style for them. One thing companies don't wanna do is upset loyal customers and lose their clientele, not everyone's a techy - and if D&D were to go all out digital, this could affect sales, interest, and popularity with some of the older gaming generations. However, adding a digital world would in fact open a lot of doors and spark some new interests, not to mention the amount of multi-tasking it could have on DMs. It's a good direction to go in as long as they stay focuased on all areas of the game.
I can totally see D&D disappearing in regards to Hasbro no longer seeing it as a current success. Yes, the books have been selling well - but what about in 3 to 5 years when the 4E books have become oversaturarted and painted into a corner? When there is a need for a new edition - what if hasbro sees its time to keep D&D as an asset and not a current product line?
The current objectives for 4E have failed I would say. They wanted 4E to be the edition of intergrated technology and failed. They made a damn good edition none-the-less and I love it, but what if their objectives they would produce for 5E are still short sigthed? What if technology still can't support their objectives?
Its very possibly Hasbro will keep D&D in their grasp though and not sell it to say paizo or white wolf etc, for in 15 - 20 years when people will be salivating for its return.
If they pulled D&D off the market for 20 years, something else would swoop in and take its place. I doubt, seriously, that anyone would stop D&D completely. Its a money maker. Look at warhammer 40k, they don't change the game that often, but continue to make millions off figs alone. Whenever fig sales are down, they release a new set of figs that people rush out to buy.
Besides, in 15 to 20 years, hasbro and wotc might not even exist or D&D might be crap in the eyes of the newer generations of gamers. You never know what might happen and regardless of that possibility, a company doesn't save things to make money on in the future, when they can make as much as they can in the present and then revise it, throw some new paint on it and sell it again as a new product.
Companies are made up of people and people want to get paid more. Pulling a product that sells to save it for a rainy day just doesn't make sense. D&D needs to get as much money as it can before people no longer care about it.
Remember marbles and jacks? Kids these days rather play video games than marbles or jacks. One day, D&D will be one of those things that can't quite measure up. Hell, it took video games to get kicks back into playing with army men. Those green plastic things. For a long time, toys R us didn't even stock them out here, but after those army men games, they were popular again.
There is yet hope for pen and paper roleplaying and the next generations.
Today I used some scrap paper to print out homework for my English class of Korean children, a generation and nation of chidlren completely attached to consoles, computers and the internet... the scrap paper happened to be from a pile of print-outs of "Thunderspire Labyrinth" which I had discarded because the printer had made a mess of them... the children often check out the backs of their handouts to see what interesting scribbles there are... they were completely baffled by the grid maps and strange text... one girl started to read aloud, "A well in this room hides a phalagar, a squidlike creature that burrows through the earth and uses its tentacles to grab and rend its prey... Teacher, what is this??"
"It is a game about knights... like King Arthur. You pretend to be knights and meet dangerous witches liek Morgan le Fay and fight dragons."
"We want to play that game!" the class cries in chorus.
"Perhaps we could some day... after all, it is not a computer game, so we could all play with just paper and pencils and some dice."
"Yes, let us play it!"
"Anyways... back to the boy who cried wolf..."
Hooray for indoctrination!
(That's tongue in cheek by the way)
I read in a gencon interview that 6e will be played exclusively by robots.
I read in a gencon interview that 6e will be played exclusively by robots.
*smirk*
Dont laugh. Humans will need 'brain upgrades' just to keep up with these robots.
I read in a gencon interview that 6e will be played exclusively by our Mighty and Benificent Robot Overlords .
"Autobots, Transform And Roll Initiative!"
The starter set comes with a DM bot.
In the future, Dungeons & Dragons will be played on Motorbikes.
If we really wanna get technical, D&D is already on its 6th edition.
1. Dungeons & Dragon (the basics)
2. Advanced Dungeons & Dragons
3. AD&D 2nd Edition
4. 3E
5. 3.5
6. 4E
To get really, really technical, there were five distinct editions of OD&D, and if 3e and 3.5 count as different editions, I think the "revised" 2e should too. So...
1. OD&D (white box)
2. OD&D (Blue Box Basic)
3. AD&D
4. OD&D (magenta box Basic, blue box Expert)
5. OD&D (red box Basic, Blue Box Expert, Gold Box Compaion, Black Box Expert, plus Immortal set)
6. AD&D 2nd Edition
7. OD&D (hardback book)
8. AD&D 2nd Edition, revised
9. D&D 3e
10. D&D 3.5
11. D&D 4e.
"I can totally see D&D disappearing in regards to Hasbro no longer seeing it as a current success. Yes, the books have been selling well - but what about in 3 to 5 years when the 4E books have become oversaturarted and painted into a corner? When there is a need for a new edition - what if hasbro sees its time to keep D&D as an asset and not a current product line?"
I personally dont think Hasbro has ever really "got" social gaming - odd to say for a gaming company. AKA how to make money by getting people together to just play the existing games.
They seem to be more about how can they reprint something so that lots of people will buy it. Which is why I am surprised they havent started creating "roll up" books combining all the players handbooks and Dragon Magazine stuff into one Leather Bound volume for 0 or something.
I think eventually they will "wake up" and pull in some of us "Gray beard" players to "fix up" 4E for 5th Edition. 4E has potential as it fixed alot of things but I think they shifted the balance too far towards rigid creations that the game has lost alot of freedom and wonder in creating characters it used it have. Thus limiting creating any character that players could imagine - through feats, powers and other choices such that a 15th level xxx character is nearly the same as another 15th level xxx character. If 5E provides more choice per level and empowers the player to create a Samurai, Ninja, Enchantress, Druid w/o shapechange, Ranger who uses a Mallet or whatever - then the system will be more worthy of being called Dungeons and Dragons.
"I can totally see D&D disappearing in regards to Hasbro no longer seeing it as a current success. Yes, the books have been selling well - but what about in 3 to 5 years when the 4E books have become oversaturarted and painted into a corner? When there is a need for a new edition - what if hasbro sees its time to keep D&D as an asset and not a current product line?"
I personally dont think Hasbro has ever really "got" social gaming - odd to say for a gaming company. AKA how to make money by getting people together to just play the existing games.
They seem to be more about how can they reprint something so that lots of people will buy it. Which is why I am surprised they havent started creating "roll up" books combining all the players handbooks and Dragon Magazine stuff into one Leather Bound volume for 0 or something.
I think eventually they will "wake up" and pull in some of us "Gray beard" players to "fix up" 4E for 5th Edition. 4E has potential as it fixed alot of things but I think they shifted the balance too far towards rigid creations that the game has lost alot of freedom and wonder in creating characters it used it have. Thus limiting creating any character that players could imagine - through feats, powers and other choices such that a 15th level xxx character is nearly the same as another 15th level xxx character. If 5E provides more choice per level and empowers the player to create a Samurai, Ninja, Enchantress, Druid w/o shapechange, Ranger who uses a Mallet or whatever - then the system will be more worthy of being called Dungeons and Dragons.
Very well put. When TSR was formed, it was all about the gaming experience. Since Hasbro jumped on the band wagon with Wizards, it became more about marketing than anything else. 3e and 3.5, IMO, lost something - 4e has tried to put that flavor back into it by incorporating some things that were tossed out of OD&D, but I think as long as Hasbro has a say in it, it'll still be missing that flavor that it once had. Times change, but that doesn't mean that it has to lose its luster. Some of us 'Grey beards' could shine a lot of light on a fifth edition, afterall - we were there right from the beginning.
I don't get claims that "Every 15th level xxx is the same as every other 15 level xxx." I mean, how many qualifiers are you adding to that?
Is every 1th level Dwarf Wizard from Akanul, who chooses Magic missile, scorching burst, and Sleep the same as any other 1st level dwarf wizard from akanul with magic missile, scorching burst and sleep? Actually, no... one could be an orb, the other staff, they could have different stata, or skils trained, or feats... or even a different encounter power. And it expends dramatically when you hit 11th level, and can take one of your race's, you classes, or your multiclasses' paragon paths.
" I don't get claims that "Every 15th level xxx is the same as every other 15 level xxx." I mean, how many qualifiers are you adding to that?"
I can see your point and I can see how my statement is full of crap - but when I look at for example a Ranger - he shots a bow or uses two weapons.... If I want him to use a Big Axe or a Hammer or something - he cant really diverge into that much. In your example of the wizard, its true he can select an orb or staff or whatever...but up to level 10 - (at least here) most Level 10 war Wizards with a Staff of defense are nearly the same as other ones... as it seems the lack of options for spells has my players select about the same spells each time one is created simply because certain spells seem to be better than others. I rarely ever see a Wizard take Ray of Frost, or Cloud of Daggers - but more often select Magic Missile or Scorching Burst then Burning Hands for the encounter power then Rolling Thunder, Acid Arrow or Flaming Sphere.
Guess thats just the people here
I rarely ever see a Wizard take Ray of Frost, or Cloud of Daggers - but more often select Magic Missile or Scorching Burst then Burning Hands for the encounter power then Rolling Thunder, Acid Arrow or Flaming Sphere.Guess thats just the people here
Must be there.
The wizards around here are quite a diverse lot. Heck, my wizard only has one of the powers you mentioned (Scorching Burst so he had an AoE minon killer to go along with Illusory Ambush and... Ray of Frost ).The point is, with the Power Books, and future Power Book 2s, we're getting more options than you might EVER BE ABLE TO USE. This is a sign that few characters will be quite the same. At-Wills may overlap, because we're not going to be an over abundance of those, but as the Encounter and Daily and Utility powers expand, and the ability to Hybrid Class and of course retaining the ability to Multiclass as you do it open up, there will be a plethora of options for creating your character.
Right now, you probably don't want to pay a pure Ranger if you're going a Big Mallet or other big weapon. That's the thing - fluff is mutable, and you can obtain almost any part of the Ranger's crunch through Multiclass feats or through Hybridclassing and still have other options. Your Big Mallet sounds more like a Barbarian. However, I think there's theoretical space for a Ranger with a two-handed weapon, and we may be seeing it at the beginning of next year with Martial Power 2. 4e is only so condensed as your imagination and your ability to criss-cross classes and feats and powers are.
I guess a big weapon was a bad example but what I was trying to say with the Ranger as an example is why do so many powers have to be so "cornered". For example, if I want a Ranger who just specializes in a sword - almost all the powers in the PHB are "you must be weilding two melee weapons or a ranged weapon" to use them. Its too bad there cant just be some Ranger Powers single weapon that simply say "with the rangers weapon of choice". When you create one now - its either Archer, Two Blade or Beast Mastery. Before 4E, the ranger I loved to play was Longsword and Bow and could switch between the two when he needed range or close quarters. Oh - well, maybe they will add powers to open things up moving forward. Prereqs are fine and I think going to be needed - esp if you are going to try to do some martial arts for fighters in the future (aka get a 1st level power - then at 3rd get the next one which has the 1st level power as a pre-req so people dont just grab a 5th level power and skip all the lower level powers that lead up to it).
I guess maybe the problem will all work out as they develop new material but I guess 4E feels alot like a step backwards for player creative freedom over the past releases... I'm still hopeful for the future of a 5E.
You can easily wield one weapon with the Beastmaster powers. They don't require two weapons. I get what you're saying in that I am sure you mean you'd like to be able to wield one weapon and not have a beast companion. However, it's not like you can't make it work within the context of what is there.
Personally, when I played 3e I saw a lot of the same builds over and over because if there's something broken or even mildly overpowered the players will latch onto it. This is edition specific either. I have actually seen more diverse builds in 4e. That's my experience at least. YMMV.
You can easily wield one weapon with the Beastmaster powers. They don't require two weapons. I get what you're saying in that I am sure you mean you'd like to be able to wield one weapon and not have a beast companion. However, it's not like you can't make it work within the context of what is there.
Personally, when I played 3e I saw a lot of the same builds over and over because if there's something broken or even mildly overpowered the players will latch onto it. This is edition specific either. I have actually seen more diverse builds in 4e. That's my experience at least. YMMV.
I tried doing that with Beastmaster with a Hawk - and tried to make a mix of Longsword and Bow. But there was just too much lameness for me. Things like Pack Alertness for my 2nd level -+2 to perception? Thats worth the wait for a utlity and I kept running into alot of "you must be weilding two weapons" again. Then at third level - there was no Daily for RAPTOR and Paired Predators doesnt work for a Bear - then Bear did 1d12 (which should be more) and Raptor did less damage than a Spider. Overall, here we just felt alot of lameness with Beastmaster - so we gave up trying to build a Rapter/Longsword/Bow Ranger.
Maybe we gave up to early but when your fav class gets a "perceived" nutering - one just kinda gets annoyed.
As more Power series books come along, we'll see more powers for you to choose from, and your problem will be solved.
I guess a big weapon was a bad example but what I was trying to say with the Ranger as an example is why do so many powers have to be so "cornered". For example, if I want a Ranger who just specializes in a sword - almost all the powers in the PHB are "you must be weilding two melee weapons or a ranged weapon" to use them.
You're looking at it wrong. You don't go 'I want to be a ranger. Why can't I use one weapon?'. You go 'I want to use one weapon. What class best represents that character?'. You work from concept to class, rather than trying to shoehorn something into a class based on its name.
It's not 'I want to be a ranger specialized with a sword', it's 'I want to play a character specialized with a sword'. Then you go from there.
You're looking at it wrong. You don't go 'I want to be a ranger. Why can't I use one weapon?'. You go 'I want to use one weapon. What class best represents that character?'. You work from concept to class, rather than trying to shoehorn something into a class based on its name.It's not 'I want to be a ranger specialized with a sword', it's 'I want to play a character specialized with a sword'. Then you go from there.
This^^^
I guess a big weapon was a bad example but what I was trying to say with the Ranger as an example is why do so many powers have to be so "cornered". For example, if I want a Ranger who just specializes in a sword - almost all the powers in the PHB are "you must be weilding two melee weapons or a ranged weapon" to use them.
You're looking at it wrong. You don't go 'I want to be a ranger. Why can't I use one weapon?'. You go 'I want to use one weapon. What class best represents that character?'. You work from concept to class, rather than trying to shoehorn something into a class based on its name.
It's not 'I want to be a ranger specialized with a sword', it's 'I want to play a character specialized with a sword'. Then you go from there.
Or you can just take the appropriate feat to specialize in a specific weapon.
Or you can just take the appropriate feat to specialize in a specific weapon.
See. The fact you can do this multiple ways proves that there are a plethora of options. This is a key point of 4e.
Or you can just take the appropriate feat to specialize in a specific weapon.
See. The fact you can do this multiple ways proves that there are a plethora of options. This is a key point of 4e.
The fact you can take a feat to specialize in something does not fix the problem when the powers for a class say that "you must be using two handed fighting " or "you must be using a ranged weapon". We used to use feats to create what you wanted - mix and match - but when the powers restrict that - that option is not so palatable.
Before 4E, the ranger I loved to play was Longsword and Bow and could switch between the two when he needed range or close quarters. Oh - well, maybe they will add powers to open things up moving forward. Prereqs are fine and I think going to be needed - esp if you are going to try to do some martial arts for fighters in the future (aka get a 1st level power - then at 3rd get the next one which has the 1st level power as a pre-req so people dont just grab a 5th level power and skip all the lower level powers that lead up to it).I guess maybe the problem will all work out as they develop new material but I guess 4E feels alot like a step backwards for player creative freedom over the past releases... I'm still hopeful for the future of a 5E.
I recalled seeing Ranger powers that didn't require either two weapons or a ranged weapon, so I just used the Character builder to create a 10th-level Ranger that can indeed wield either a longsword or a longbow as he sees fit. The only level of power for this character where there wasn't a power that worked with a single melee weapon or a ranged weapon was 5th-level Dailies. There I picked a ranged power since you specifically said your character could use both as required. I've attached the summary below (I miss sblocks on the forums...)
====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&D Character Builder ======
Erdan, level 10
Elf, Ranger
Fighting Style: Archer Fighting Style
FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 18, Con 13, Dex 18, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 11.
STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 16, Con 13, Dex 14, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 11.
AC: 24 Fort: 22 Reflex: 22 Will: 19
HP: 70 Surges: 7 Surge Value: 17
TRAINED SKILLS
Nature +14, Perception +14, Stealth +13, Athletics +13, Endurance +10
UNTRAINED SKILLS
Acrobatics +8, Arcana +5, Bluff +5, Diplomacy +5, Dungeoneering +7, Heal +7, History +5, Insight +7, Intimidate +5, Religion +5, Streetwise +5, Thievery +8
FEATS
Level 1: Lethal Hunter
Level 2: Martial Freedom
Level 4: Agile Hunter
Level 6: Elven Precision
Level 8: Quick Draw
Level 10: Hunter's Aim
POWERS
Ranger at-will 1: Hunter's Teamwork
Ranger at-will 1: Hit and Run
Ranger encounter 1: Evasive Strike
Ranger daily 1: Hunter's Bear Trap
Ranger utility 2: Yield Ground
Ranger encounter 3: Shadow Wasp Strike
Ranger daily 5: Splintering Shot
Ranger utility 6: Weave Through the Fray
Ranger encounter 7: Hawk's Talon
Ranger daily 9: Ranger's Recovery
Ranger utility 10: Shed the Mark
ITEMS
Adventurer's Kit, Hide Armor, Longbow, Longsword, Arrows (30), Dagger (3)
====== Copy to Clipboard and Press the Import Button on the Summary Tab ======
Or you can just take the appropriate feat to specialize in a specific weapon.
See. The fact you can do this multiple ways proves that there are a plethora of options. This is a key point of 4e.
The fact you can take a feat to specialize in something does not fix the problem when the powers for a class say that "you must be using two handed fighting " or "you must be using a ranged weapon". We used to use feats to create what you wanted - mix and match - but when the powers restrict that - that option is not so palatable.
I take it you didn't read my post at all, then?
If your character uses one weapon, then he's not a ranger. He's something else. Work from the concept, then find a class that fits it.
I take it you didn't read my post at all, then?
If your character uses one weapon, then he's not a ranger. He's something else. Work from the concept, then find a class that fits it.
Oh I read it - but maybe you can suggest something - I want to use a striker with a Longsword, Bow and have a Hawk as a pet. Feel free to create an effective character for me.
I take it you didn't read my post at all, then?
If your character uses one weapon, then he's not a ranger. He's something else. Work from the concept, then find a class that fits it.
Oh I read it - but maybe you can suggest something - I want to use a striker with a Longsword, Bow and have a Hawk as a pet. Feel free to create an effective character for me.
Bard with Familiar.
Or do what Nightwhisper just did, only take Beast Mastery instead of Archery Fighting Style, and include some beast powers amidst your normal powers. In fact, many beast powers allow you to use either a melee weapon or a ranged weapon in addition to your beast companion's attack, so that fits perfectly in with your character.
Thank you, Anubis.
Alternately, since you do want something the Ranger does offer (the pet), then Ranger *does* work for you as well.
====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&D Character Builder ======
Tarak, level 1
Half-Orc, Ranger
Build: Beastmaster Ranger
Fighting Style: Beast Mastery
Beast Companion Type: Raptor
Background: Occupation - Military (+2 to Athletics)
FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 18, Con 12, Dex 18, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 8.
STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 16, Con 12, Dex 16, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 8.
AC: 17 Fort: 15 Reflex: 15 Will: 11
HP: 24 Surges: 7 Surge Value: 6
TRAINED SKILLS
Dungeoneering +6, Heal +6, Stealth +8, Athletics +10, Endurance +7
UNTRAINED SKILLS
Acrobatics +3, Arcana, Bluff -1, Diplomacy -1, History, Insight +1, Intimidate +1, Nature +1, Perception +1, Religion, Streetwise -1, Thievery +3
FEATS
Level 1: Weapon Focus (Bow)
POWERS
Ranger at-will 1: Hunter's Teamwork
Ranger at-will 1: Circling Strike
Ranger encounter 1: Synchronized Strike
Ranger daily 1: Partnered Savaging
ITEMS
Adventurer's Kit, Hide Armor, Longsword, Longbow, Arrows (60)
RITUALS
Raise Beast Companion
====== Copy to Clipboard and Press the Import Button on the Summary Tab ======
There you go. Effective (not optimal, but effective) character who uses a longsword, a longbow, and has a bird.
As more Power series books come along, we'll see more powers for you to choose from, and your problem will be solved.
Especially with Martial classes. I believe it will be unlikely we will ever see new classes in the Martial power source. It seems thematically easier to create new classes when you're dealign with whizz-bang powers. In the realm of Martial many things seem more geared to being a build of an existing martial class.
Case in point, over in the "What classes would you like to see?" thread there were several suggestions along the lines of "a hoplite that wields spear and shield." Perfectly doable with a fighter now, but a more specilized version could work as a build off an existing martial class.