[Not 4e] What will we see from 5e?

[ggroy]

[Username17]

A better question is whether modules are actually making much money for WotC in the first place, in comparison to splatbooks.

A good question. Back in 3e days they confirmed in no uncertain terms that there was a sharply tiered sales market where "Core Rule Books" sold substantially more than "Splat Books" and those sold substantially more than "Adventures" or "Setting Books." That was so much of a given fact that they made the DMG 2 (which was really no more interesting or in-depth than a random entry in the "We're Outside" series) and the PHB 2 (which was really no more indepth or interesting than another entry in the Complete series). It was pretty blatant, right? The PHB 2 has 29 more pages than Complete Adventurer or Complete Divine, and it has 4 bonus base classes instead of 3. Would you say that amazing difference makes it more of a must-have? Would you say that there's more meat in Knight, Duskblade, Dragon Shaman, Beguiler than in Ninja, Spellthief, Scout? Nevertheless, it has been confirmed that PHB2 outsold any of the Completes by a substantial margin. I think more than any two combined, but I may be misremembering that statistic.

But 4e took it a step farther. Maybe a step too far? First of all, they made virtually everything a Complete Book. Secondly, they gave everything sequels. And thirdly, they declared everything to be a Core Rulebook. Martial Power 2 just isn't going to have the same cache as the PHB 2. Has the blatant overuse of the "Core Rulebook" term finally cried wolf to the point of robbing it of its sales power? Obviously there's an efficiency function there, but I don't know where the maximization point is - but it's pretty obviously less book spamming than what they've been doing. Are we to believe them so Machiavellian that they made all of 4th edition as a deliberate market saturation test to figure out the maximization point? Probably not. But if I was on their dev team, I would make a note on where the sales drop-offs were and plan a release cycle t maximize profits rather than products.

But you know what? I'm not on the dev team, and I honestly think I am smarter than the people on the dev team. After all, 3e's release schedule was already designed that way based on 2e AD&D sales figures by someone I regard as much smarter than anyone on their team right now: Ryan Dancey. The brand management back then was amazing. And it sold like hotcakes. And here's the key portions:

• 3 Core Books, with new Core Books coming in 3 years. This could (and should) be refined to 3 Core Rule Books at the beginning, with 1 additional Core book coming out each year.
• 1 "Hardcover" book coming out each month (FRCS, Manual of the Planes, Deities and Demigods).
• 1 "Softcover" book coming out each month (Skip Hates Sorcerers, Loot & Lute, etc.)
• Let the community thrive as much as possible while White Wolf fucking dies.

The first major mistake was making a 3.5 set of core rule books instead of making a PHB 2 and a DMG 2 and then putting out new printings of the Core Books that had the revisions announced in the PHB2 and DMG2 already in them. That would have allowed them to sell more books without splitting the fanbase. But the 4e book spam project just looks like a string of mistakes so close together that it's hard to tell the difference between it and just a single continuous mistake.

-Username17

[Judging__Eagle]

You mean, sell an evolving system, instead of new systems?

Right?

The way that AD&D became AD&D 2RE in the late 90's? and how I can use the entire range of 2e products together? (supposedly)

[ggroy]

[souran]

Here is the thing,

I LIKE 4th ed D&D but I am already to the point where I just don't need more of the content that 4e is pushing.

PHB/DMG/MM 1 and 2 are ok ideas.
A splat for each power source is an ok idea
A book with magic loot is an ok idea

I get that they want to gurpify the game and put out a PHB/DMG/MM every year. I am probably even ok with that although as the classes get more and more esoteric and less iconic I think that the sales will suffer. A book with Samurai, Bird Ninja, Ghost Rider, Aquaman, and Accountant PC classes is just not that useful to most people.

A second and third splat book for each power source feels equally like a waste of money. However, that pales in compairson to the idea of having a new adventuers vault book EVERY YEAR along with magic items appearing in dragon, adventures, and every other sourcebook.

The thing about 4e magic items is that they are presented like magic cards. A typical page in two colums holds 3-4 of these in each column. Say 5-6 a page is pretty standard. The number of magic items that now exists is somwhere in the 1000s. Granted most of them are not the ones pcs are hungering for, of which there are about 100. However, investing $30 dollars to add the next THOUSAND magic items to my game when my party will likely never get bored of all the ones I currently have seems like a mega waste.

Powers are turning into this as well. Most classes have close to 100 powers now. Now some of them are clearly superior and some of them nobody would ever use but most of them can be made into functional character. Why in the world does anybody need a SECOND SPLAT for a single class.

Anyway, I thnk that a lot of 5e decisions will be made based on the bottom line. I wonder if we won't see the return of black & White art to D&D books.

[RobbyPants]

Get the most amount of cash out of the horse, before it keels over?

This reminds me of the Dilbert comic for today. Simply replace "CEO" with "next edition", and you're all set.

[Kaelik]

Would you say that there's more meat in Knight, Duskblade, Dragon Shaman, Beguiler than in Ninja, Spellthief, Scout? Nevertheless, it has been confirmed that PHB2 outsold any of the Completes by a substantial margin.

To be fair. I'd say that the Beguiler alone is more meat than the entire Complete Adventurer book.

[Lago PARANOIA]

5) Multiattacks will either become a thing of the past or become universally and uniformly implemented.

I doubt this.

I'm guessing they'll do the "we tried to eliminate them" but keep putting loopholes in expansion books all over for multiattacks.

The said thing is, if 4e had just let the [#W] notation include the pile of BS bonuses, then 3W+Stat would have been marginally better than a power that let you attack 3 times and Rain of Blows never would have been a game breaker

To WotC's credit, they are getting better about completely blamming things that grant single-targmultiattacks. Not much better, since they still print auto-damaging zones, but better.

Of course, it's all pretty meaningless because until they get rid of the older stuff and errata Twin Strike it won't mean jack. But hey. They're learning.

Ever read Flowers for Algernon?

A second and third splat book for each power source feels equally like a waste of money. However, that pales in compairson to the idea of having a new adventuers vault book EVERY YEAR along with magic items appearing in dragon, adventures, and every other sourcebook.

Frank and I suggested getting around this by not releasing option-specific books anymore. Books either detail brand-new mechanics and options like Book of Nine Swords or the Miniatures Handbook, or more commonly detail a theme that gets expanded upon that people can generically use. Like Stormwrack or Frostburn.

Writing books like Stormwrack was actually a very good idea, it's just that those books came at the end of 3E's lifecycle so they didn't get the attention and sales they deserved.

Books like Martial Power and Loot and Lute should come at the end of 5th Edition's lifecycle, when there's a lot of books already out and the challenge is convincing new people to pick up a book since there are so many of them already. Releasing Spell Compendium when they did was a great idea.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Some more 5E predictions:

The power card system of doing powers isn't going to be dropped. Probably because A) D&D has been using a system like this for forever anyway, just less formalized and B) It's convenient for both the player and writer. Unfortunately, they're still going to be using a bunch of stupid-ass names for them.

Powers are still going to rely on mostly stock effects. They are probably still going to use the PHB2's resolution system for doing powers. While there probably won't be any repeat powers from 4E the setup is going to seem shockingly familiar. Which is actually kind of sad, because even though the powers themselves suck 4E (with a couple of exceptions like zones) has one of the best power-resolution systems ever.

Either opportunity actions or immediate actions are going to go. I'm putting money on opportuniy actions and them just declaring that unless a power or maneuver says otherwise you can only use that power or one like it once per round.

5E will continue 4E's system of declaring that heroes are epic and world-shattering and all that without actually giving them such abilities. Why? Because certain assholes (even on this board) still think that certain classes should have a fundamentally inferior flavor text to other classes and you can't really take this too far without making the inferior classes worthless. On the other hand, people still like the idea of their characters going from nobody to Superman so they won't just flat-out go 'the power level is set at Lord of the Rings'. They'll just do that without telling anyone.

[Psychic Robot]

[ggroy]

[Lago PARANOIA]

I never liked prestige classes, I much prefer the idea of using affiliations (touched on in 3.5 PHB2) to give bonuses to skills and allow/simplify access to special abilities (an early version of what I think Lago was referring to with 'training arcs' - requiring (or at least offering) sidequests to 'unlock' new feats and abilities)

Oh God, affiliations.

I'm not saying that 5E won't use it, but it is one of the worst things ever to be slathered onto an RPG book.

They have two completely unworkable things about them:

1) It puts unreasonable pressure onto the DM to include story elements that they may not want to introduce. If a player wants to have an affiliation of 'Brotherhood of Freedom' where their big thing is that they free slaves then the DM has to introduce slavery into their campaign. That's bad enough already, but everytime I've seen these things they tend to be incredibly specific. Not just a thieves' guild, but a halfling thieves' guild charter in Summersun. Fuck that.

2) It requires players to min-max their background. Now I'm all for people putting thought into their character, but fuck this school of thought. This bullshit always ends up with stuff like this:

PC: And then my barbarian warrior blah blah blah fight on Thunderplains blah blah married a human woman to bring peace between tribes blah blah and then suddenly got interested in the Knights of the Rose so that's why I have this ability.
DM: No offense, but why did they join the Knight of the Rose? Wouldn't Savage of the Plain fit your character better? That organization is on the other side of the world from your character.
PC: Yes, but Savage of the Plain doesn't have a single damn ability that I want my character to use. So I'm a Knight of the Rose. Anyway, my character stepped on a teleportation tile. Any other retarded questions?

So, no. Get that shit out of the game.

[Orion]

Would you say that there's more meat in Knight, Duskblade, Dragon Shaman, Beguiler than in Ninja, Spellthief, Scout?

Yes. All the PHB 2 classes addressed or attempted to address mechanical failings of the system.

Knight: The flavor text for full-BAB classes calls them meatshields, but they can't tank. Solution: write tank class.

Beguiler: As well all know, the Warmage-style casters are more flavorful and better for the game than Wizard-style ones. Beguiler is the coolest and most playable of the lot.

Duskblade: People have been asking for a gish class from day one. Not only did they finally write one, they made one who actually attacks with swords and spells, unlike the Eldirtch Knight, who only attacks with swords.

Dragon Disciple: let people heal without being divine, or making them learn how to manage a preparation caster. Put out an obviously supernatural character with simple mechanics and a mix of martial and magical abilities.

Now, I think Knight and Dragon Disciple pretty much failed, but they all tried to do something worthwhile. Compare:

Spellthief: broken on first principles
Ninja: Like a rogue, except shitty
Scout: like a rogue, except shitty

I don't see how this one is close.

[Hegemonic]

I never liked prestige classes, I much prefer the idea of using affiliations (touched on in 3.5 PHB2) to give bonuses to skills and allow/simplify access to special abilities (an early version of what I think Lago was referring to with 'training arcs' - requiring (or at least offering) sidequests to 'unlock' new feats and abilities)

Oh God, affiliations.

I'm not saying that 5E won't use it, but it is one of the worst things ever to be slathered onto an RPG book.

They have two completely unworkable things about them:

1) It puts unreasonable pressure onto the DM to include story elements that they may not want to introduce. If a player wants to have an affiliation of 'Brotherhood of Freedom' where their big thing is that they free slaves then the DM has to introduce slavery into their campaign. That's bad enough already, but everytime I've seen these things they tend to be incredibly specific. Not just a thieves' guild, but a halfling thieves' guild charter in Summersun. Fuck that.

2) It requires players to min-max their background. Now I'm all for people putting thought into their character, but fuck this school of thought. This bullshit always ends up with stuff like this:

PC: And then my barbarian warrior blah blah blah fight on Thunderplains blah blah married a human woman to bring peace between tribes blah blah and then suddenly got interested in the Knights of the Rose so that's why I have this ability.
DM: No offense, but why did they join the Knight of the Rose? Wouldn't Savage of the Plain fit your character better? That organization is on the other side of the world from your character.
PC: Yes, but Savage of the Plain doesn't have a single damn ability that I want my character to use. So I'm a Knight of the Rose. Anyway, my character stepped on a teleportation tile. Any other retarded questions?

So, no. Get that shit out of the game.

Yeah, I can see that being a serious problem during character creation. I was thinking more of introducing them throughout the campaign rather than making them accessible as backgrounds, which I think would be less significant and much more general. IE, "I was a page at court, I was a farmer, I was once petrified by a Beholder and sent to the Abyss, so I get +1 to arcana, yay" and I wouldn't really care much if there's some min-maxing there. It happens in everything anyway, at least I can screw with the players later for picking ridiculous backgrounds.

It's not required, which can be accomplished either by nuking the bonuses to the point of insignificance/very specific application (making them borderline fluff), or by making them optional high-level gameplay mechanics -only- (IE, nobody of any significance in The World of Mighty Heroes cares about first level anybody, or if they do, there are zero bonuses attached). Alternatively, you could create the bonuses as you go along and just forget about it as part of character creation/kit.

Despite it being difficult to balance, I like the idea of orders and guilds and churches actually granting bonuses, even if they are by necessity small - I'm not talking about bonus feats and attack bonuses or feat-equivalent boosts to anything. Even skill boosts would have to be A) less than what a feat can grant and B) limited in application to a few specific circumstances. It may be better to focus such rewards on money and land for those wishing to engage in warfare or stronghold building. Enchanting services, discount hirelings, etc - so long as there's no money loop.

So, what's the alternative to Prestige Classes/Paragon Paths? Honestly, affiliations are hardly my favorite candidate to replace them, they're more part of a suite of options, including changeable player 'kits' that are really just 'suggested builds' for traditional characters such as the Fighter, Ranger, etc. but with added flexibility and less "You're a Ranger so you get Tracking and Favored Enemies and a bonus to one of these two weapons." At the very least, it should be "You've chosen to learn to track, fight with a bow, and focus on learning to fight Orcs and Giantkin - sounds like you're a Ranger." But the difference shouldn't just be cosmetic, it should also include more options for the player in the creation and advancement process.

And, yes, as affiliations do offer a way to automate/remove roleplaying burden from players who don't want to do it - I bet 5E will include it. I'm thinking of it more as a 'reward' for RP, but in reality it will be probably turn into a crutch.

[ggroy]

[Guyr Adamantine]

Or even worse. WotC is run by Beavis and Butthead.

Beavis: ''We're the CEO of Wizards of the Coast!''
Butthead: ''Hurr hurr, you said wizz.''