The Gaming Den

Do you think that this edition will:

A) Expand upon 3E mechanics?
B) Expand upon 4E mechanics?
C) Do some bizarre hybrid of the two to try to avoid alienating fans?
D) Make a new system altogether?

If I was a corporate suit who didn't know anything about mechanics, I'd probably push to have an edition that was mostly 3E but had 4E tropes slathered all over it. It'd cut Pathfinder off at the knees and would have the best chance of uniting the fanbase. Of course this misses the point that a good edition would do it the same and do it better (since at this point both editions to me are unfixable without throwing practically everything out) but I don't think that a corporate suit would think that far ahead.

It'll be 4e-based.

I want to vote for C, but it's really hard to say what Wizards is going to do with D&D. I don't think that they've ever really had a vision for the game.

Anyhow, I'm going to split my vote.

A) 0%. I absolutely do not see this happening. It's as likely as them reviving AD&D.

B) 35%. This is a strong possibility. I'm pretty sure that they're going to continue polling the Wizards web site and collect data from there. Obviously, it's going to be skewed towards support for 4E.

C) 45%. This is the most likely, imo. Chances are that those polls are still going to show people who support 3E, enough to at least to make them consider stealing ideas from it.

D) 10%. There is a slight chance that they see 4E as a complete and unsalvageable failure. In this case they'll probably use the same writers and designers that made 4E to create a brand new system from scratch. High probability that it'll be as half-ass as 4E was.

E) 10%. I'm going to include the idea that they only continue D&D as a board game under this area. They've got two out so far and at least three more coming. I don't know how financially viable they are, but it seems to be a direction they're experimenting with.

If I was a corporate suit, I would do my damndest to launch a bunch of videogames or something that might actually generate revenue for the new edition.

I'd also look real hard at selling off the brand in order to have people focus on producing the much-more-profitable CCG, but Hasbro is unlikely to do that.

5e will walk away from the tabletop entirely, and be fully online. The rules will mostly resemble Essentials, I think.

The model will most resemble DDO, but probably be broken down into even tinier pieces to pay for. Each character will cost a little...dungeons cost a little.

It wouldn't surprise me if you could buy magic items and EP with real money in 5.0. A

At this point, anything goes. As far as I can tell, 4e is a failure, essentials split the fanbase, the subscription service is widely reviled as crap, and I'm not sure what they're releasing.

But if they announce 5e, it seems that it would be tantamount to an admission that they've been releasing crap for the last few years, at least to some people. And I honestly don't see 5e catching on - I can't see myself going out and plopping down a crapton of money for new books at the moment, especially if it's made by the same idiots who brought us 4.Fail. The 4urries probably won't convert either. So really, WoTC D&D seems in the crapper no matter what they do. I'd like to see them revamp 3e and fix the flaws, but in all honesty they'll probably just release some crappy new thing that will flop.

Josh_Kablack wrote: I'd also look real hard at selling off the brand in order to have people focus on producing the much-more-profitable CCG, but Hasbro is unlikely to do that.

Short of Hasbro itself going under, it's never going to happen. They're perfectly fine with just sitting on a dying brand name for a decade, and then relaunching it to a new audience.

But yeah, I think they'll go more towards the board game direction, trying to set up a system which ideally cuts needing a human dm from the system, and allows for selling lots of class/race/powers/adventure card packs that can pushed out the door faster than making a proper book. Gamma World might just be the early alpha test for 5th edition.

I think 5e will be more like 3e than 4e, but it won't be explicitly built on 3e. They might even throw things to harken back to 1e/2e, although they'll probably choose the wrong things. I also predict the design will be shit on close inspection.

There will not be a 5th edition of D&D.

Or they'll turn it into a clone/compatible sister game to WotC's sweetheart money maker, Magic the Gathering. There are plenty of people who have wanted/actively want the two to meet and make sweet nerd enterprise love, and Magic is like Christianity. It loses tons of people every year. It also gains enough new players every year to keep growing. Hasbro will probably tell WotC to make D&D a card game which doesn't need a gm, and they can sell endless booster packs of magic items, feats, classes and races for and tons of expansions, which may grow to be like dungeons. They may work out a system where you can do multiplayer "raid" games, but have no need for someone to play the dungeon deck.

WotC has no idea what makes a successful game so they will look at the only data they can actually understand - money.

3e sold better and was more popular than 4e so it stands to reason that they will try to return to 3e in some fashion.

Dominicius wrote:WotC has no idea what makes a successful game so they will look at the only data they can actually understand - money.

3e sold better and was more popular than 4e so it stands to reason that they will try to return to 3e in some fashion.

Hence my prediction of a card game, Magic is their biggest money maker.

Probably with have a cheap, rules lite starter set sold at a loss, then they will ladle on expansions, errata and accessories in order to make money.

I can see where this model was in play (somewhat) with DDI, selling a subscription to the most up to date rules and expansions. I doubt the marketing folk will deviate much from this model.

As for rules? I doubt they give a fuck. 4e has already proven that you can sell an untested RPG that fails to meet expected design goals. Patches and errata just keep people paying.

[/cynical rant]

Looking at historical trends
1e/2e: minor rules changes with bigger changes in fluff
2e/3e: drastic change
3e/3.5e: minor change
3.5e/4e: drastic change
4e/Essentials: minor changes
Essentials/?: probably a bigger change

That's pretty simplistic since it ignores any of the underlying factors, but Essentials already strikes me as (an attempt to) return to 3e - by moving to basic attacks rather than powers, for instance, and having random treasure. At the same time, I'm very suspicious of magic item rarities...as if they're not headed to a system where the players buy booster packs and the GM draws treasures from their deck...as with Gamma World. Given lack of minis production now, the miniatures aspect may get downplayed, but its hard to say - Hasbro would have the resources to do whatever it likes.
While there's no incentive this time to rebuild the system just to avoid 3rd party competition, I think there is probably an incentive to rebuild it just because 75% of the former fanbase would rather punch themselves in the groin repeatedly than play 4e. So my vote is with 'new and bizarre'.

Dominicius wrote:WotC has no idea what makes a successful game so they will look at the only data they can actually understand - money.

Doubt it. Game designers as a whole are too cocky about their abilities to ever do anything that goes against whatever option they think is best.

Bleh the only person who can answer this is the next ego tripping lead designer who will be hired by WOTC after they fire Mearls..

D&D card games have never been especially successful. Remember Spellfire?

Master Prediction for 5e D&D

it will suck

(boom shaka laka)

Prak_Anima wrote:Or they'll turn it into a clone/compatible sister game to WotC's sweetheart money maker, Magic the Gathering. There are plenty of people who have wanted/actively want the two to meet and make sweet nerd enterprise love, and Magic is like Christianity. It loses tons of people every year. It also gains enough new players every year to keep growing. Hasbro will probably tell WotC to make D&D a card game which doesn't need a gm, and they can sell endless booster packs of magic items, feats, classes and races for and tons of expansions, which may grow to be like dungeons. They may work out a system where you can do multiplayer "raid" games, but have no need for someone to play the dungeon deck.

Sounds something akin to Shadows over Camelot. Actually, if that sort of thing could be expanded to be more free form, story-driven, and have more character customization, I'd probably be OK with it, except for the CCG part of it. Aren't Roleplayers net savvy enough that we would just find the card info online and design the character we want?

Stubbazubba wrote:

Prak_Anima wrote:Or they'll turn it into a clone/compatible sister game to WotC's sweetheart money maker, Magic the Gathering. There are plenty of people who have wanted/actively want the two to meet and make sweet nerd enterprise love, and Magic is like Christianity. It loses tons of people every year. It also gains enough new players every year to keep growing. Hasbro will probably tell WotC to make D&D a card game which doesn't need a gm, and they can sell endless booster packs of magic items, feats, classes and races for and tons of expansions, which may grow to be like dungeons. They may work out a system where you can do multiplayer "raid" games, but have no need for someone to play the dungeon deck.

Sounds something akin to Shadows over Camelot. Actually, if that sort of thing could be expanded to be more free form, story-driven, and have more character customization, I'd probably be OK with it, except for the CCG part of it. Aren't Roleplayers net savvy enough that we would just find the card info online and design the character we want?

What makes you think WotC is still marketing to roleplayers anymore?

I'm gonna guess D. I think they are going to ignore 3rd in order to save face and try to break away from 4th into newer territory. I'm pretty sure PF have deftly handled getting a grip on 3rd and 4th has embarrassed them. If they don't straight up give up on DnD then they are going to do something drastic.

Hasbro only understands toys and boardgames. This means each new edition of DnD they own will be made to sell toys and boardgames.

I mean, if they really understood IP management, they'd be making movies and cartoons and computer games and selling cross-promotional crap like folders for school binders and T-shirts.

K's totally right, but the problem is: do you think that anyone would even want the D&D license at this point? If I was in charge of a big corporation I would be salivating at D&D's underperformance and could probably convince Hasbro to hand up the IP for a song since it's 'just' a board game to them.

The problem is, there's no guarantee that anyone else would see the potential. If D&D changes hands within a few years at all it'll probably be by accident as opposed to someone going 'just think of the potential!'

Lago PARANOIA wrote:K's totally right, but the problem is: do you think that anyone would even want the D&D license at this point? If I was in charge of a big corporation I would be salivating at D&D's underperformance and could probably convince Hasbro to hand up the IP for a song since it's 'just' a board game to them.

The problem is, there's no guarantee that anyone else would see the potential. If D&D changes hands within a few years at all it'll probably be by accident as opposed to someone going 'just think of the potential!'

Probably not. I mean, Bioware decided that creating their own IP was way better than licensing when they made Dragon Age, and they used to be the goto guys for DnD cRPGs.

At the end of the day, DnD's departure from world-based IP means that they honestly don't have a lot to offer people who want to license other than the actual name "DnD."

Well, in 10-15 years if D&D continues on its current course it's not going to mean much of anything but the kind of market penetration just the name has is the envy of pretty much anything. If you needed the Next Big Thing to license on the cheap I don't think of anything that has such a good recognition/IP worth ratio.