Monte Cook IS working on 5th edition...

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:27 pm

They're not going to have something for GenCon in 2012 unless Mearls shows a degree of foresight I've never seen him having, 5E D&D is a blatant rehash of one of the previous editions, or they throw together something slapdash at the last second. Nothing more than some beta-test modules anyway.

Doom · Post by **Doom** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:44 am

I'm certainly not ruling out the possibilities of blatant rehash or slapdash assembly.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 9:25 am

At best, GenCon 2012 is going to have a preview module people can play (first level! no character customization! final destination!) with a release date for 5e in February 2013. They will be late on that date, and it will actually come out in June of 2013.

-Username17

CCarter · Post by **CCarter** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:26 am

Prak_Anima wrote:Can it really be any worse than 4e?

It can always get worse.

Even if The Forge doesn't reappear to fuck with D&D by making it get remade as Narrativist or something, having it not actually be worse depends on them not continuing down the Gamma World route of collectible cards.

I'm half expecting players to have to buy magical item decks to fill their Wishlist Deck full of Common magical items, that the GM has to draw from when the PCs find a "random" magical item.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:44 am

and also the deck of monsters compiled by the players as deck of encounters so the DM can perfectly tailor every game RANDOMLY, to the players without having to exert ANY kind of control over them.

this will also reduce the past costs tot he DM of having to own everything and the DM will now only need to buy his own set of dice and be good to go.

and of course, dungeons will be populated with rooms pre-approved with the deck of rooms the players build as well, and random drawing gives the size of the room, so when you get tot he room marked END, you stop drawing cards as you have completed the dungeon.

all of course the cards will be in random booster packs, with rare common, and uncommon, ultra rare; rooms, enemies, adventures, plots, and treasures.

so the more booster packs you buy the better your D&D game will be.

5th edition the D&D CCG RPG

Doom · Post by **Doom** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:52 am

shadzar wrote:
5th edition the D&D CCG RPG

Crud, it all sounded completely unworkably insane until that last line, which sounds all too credible.

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:22 am

I hope that 5e is more like the kind of change AD&D->D&D2e was than 2e->3e.
Or how M:tG has rules revisions that keep all cards still playable (even if they're terribly weak or banned from play, it's still nice that it's the same format). Invalidating previous edition's rulebooks and characters, no matter how 'good' your new rules are, is really what upsets people. I have an assortment of AD&D and 2e books and I had no idea they were separate game systems.

I've had fun with 4e in the state it's currently in. WotC's been self aware of their problems (combat is a grind) and corrected them over time
(Monster Vault monsters have less HP and do more damage).
Skills though are still rather ho-hum (and they know that too, so at least there's effort being put in), but they vary wildly depending on how skillful your DM is.

Between Class (hybrid also an option), Theme, and Multiclass feat I've found a pretty happy amount of customization for a character starting at level 2 (because utilities for some reason aren't at level 1...). With combat ideally lasting 3-6 rounds I've found a good amount of variety with the at-wills, encounter, and reactive abilities I have.

If they approach 5e as refinement of what they've learned/grown with 4e then I'll be happy with the product. The skill system can even be overhauled while keeping the skill names the same.

Say at character creation, something like... (wild speculation/wishlisting is still topical to this thread, yeah?)

RACE- encounter power, optional at-will, optional utilities, favored skills
CLASS- CORE Class feature+EXtra class features, core powers
THEME- thematic encounter power, optional utilities
SKILLS- sneak background into this section, optional powers tied to skills
FEAT- enhancing class features, multiclassing, 'everything else' etc.

So hypothetically I could have...
RACE- Elf, I have elfy swiftness as my encounter power
CLASS- Sword Wizard (swordmage, bladesinger, that type)
THEME*- Outlaw, I have an ambushing encounter power
SKILLS- I pick stealthy stuff
FEAT- Multiclass rogue

So at level 1 have a melee magic user whose specialty is ambushing folks and roguish activities. I play him like a Mystic Ninja.
If I changed my theme to Protector and took Endurance as a Skill, I would be more of an Arcane Knight.

*Perhaps Theme could also determine Role in the style of 4e. A protector is very much a defender, and an ambusher more Striker. A striker would use his teleport to catch a foe off guard or evade an attack, while a defender would use his teleport to intercept a foe engaging an ally or moving the ally out of harm's way.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:39 am

OgreBattle wrote:(wild speculation/wishlisting is still topical to this thread, yeah?)

Speculation, facts, making fun of WotC, making fun of Monte Cook, Making fun of D&D based decisions or personnel at WotC during any edition (past or present), hopes, etc....

if it has ANYTHING to do with 5th edition D&D, or Monte Cook specifically it is on topic for this thread.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:40 am

it's not like they're going to go back in time and unmake 4e so I'm not really interested in whatever they're putting out.

sake · Post by **sake** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:58 am

Here's a horrifying thought... what if class design abortions like the Vampire and Bladesinger were a quasi "beta test" for what they want 5E classes to be like?

Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp · Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:01 am

That is horrifying and not surprising at all.

K · Post by K » Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:53 am

I expect we'll be stuck with 4e mechanics well into 6th edition. For example, they haven't even hinted that they understand why daily/encounter/at-will powers are boring as shit and anti-immersionist for many players.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:37 am

K wrote:I expect we'll be stuck with 4e mechanics well into 6th edition. For example, they haven't even hinted that they understand why daily/encounter/at-will powers are boring as shit and anti-immersionist for many players.

I wouldn't say that. They have shown that they understand that daily/encounter/at-will powers are anti-immersionist for many players. The Essentials Fighter variants basically don't do those things. They just spam the attack button, indicating that the folks at the top do understand that players find the prospect of limited use "Fighter Powers" to be incomprehensible and insulting.

No evidence is available that they understand how fucking boring that shit is. The Slayer just runs around and hits things for big damage with a greatsword. That's literally all they do. Even an AD&D Fighter was more interesting than that. They had a bow.

-Username17

Leper · Post by **Leper** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:06 pm

Actually... Slayers use bows as well--usually just as proficiently as AD&D fighters.

And they're just as knuckle-draggingly boring to play, however.

I'd say the problem is that they published the original 4e, people got all butt-hurt because fighters didn't suck the way they were supposed to, and some other (marginally) reasonable people were annoyed because the format was different (although still surprisingly similar to things like ToB which they loved) and other people thought it was great and didn't have a problem with it.

In a ludicrous move to recapture their lost market share, they capitulated to the disenfranchised folks who won't be buying their product anymore anyways, and said "okay, fine, we'll stop actually trying to do our job and toss out some incredibly boring schlock so you can feel superior to fighter players again* which takes about 20 minutes of solid design and another hour of math checking to balance, but actually spend that last hour fellating ourselves as we take a cue from Paizo."

*Most of the people I hear praise the Essentials Martial class design are so happy to have it in the game for other people to play. (Because they're smart enough to know better than to play such a simplistic class.) Hooray for demanding shitty design for others.

The result: All the (lack of) engaging gameplay of AD&D and low-level 3e, the lack of flavor of 4e, and all the effort at mechanical sensibility of something to come out of Paizo.

Meanwhile, they reminisce about the good old days old AD&D (which were pretty good, but that had very little to do with the system) and think of new ways to piss their mark on whatever comes out next.

P.S.: Howdy.

Seerow · Post by **Seerow** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:45 pm

I don't think a Fighter having a resource to watch is a bad thing. I do think a Fighter with a daily resource is pretty retarded.

Like seriously, imagine if Fighter's had stamina that was drained as they used special moves, that was recovered with just a couple minutes of rest. So it's not "I can only do this move once per day" or even "I can only do this move once per encounter" it's "After I do that move a few times I'm too fucking tired to do anything else, so I need to mix it up a little bit for a prolonged fight"

Suddenly you have a resource system for fighters that makes some degree of sense.

Leper · Post by **Leper** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:19 pm

I can't entirely disagree with you.

I think it's pretty retarded to have a move you can do once a day--like barbarian rage in 3e.

I also think it's pretty fucking retarded for magic users, and always have, but that didn't stop 30+ years of nerdgasmic idiocy being accepted as One-True-Wayism.

On the other hand I learned to rationalize it less as "mechanics define the story" and more "story defines the mechanics." Maybe the wizard can cast X spell until his eyes bleed, but he's either waiting for the right cosmic alignments or just doesn't feel the time is right--even if that's a gross underestimation of his opponent. Same with the fightery types--sure, they can pull off that bad-ass hit at will on a training manequin who's sitting still and won't move or put up a fight, but genuine foes aren't so accommodating.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:28 pm

Seerow wrote: Like seriously, imagine if Fighter's had stamina that was drained as they used special moves, that was recovered with just a couple minutes of rest. So it's not "I can only do this move once per day" or even "I can only do this move once per encounter" it's "After I do that move a few times I'm too fucking tired to do anything else, so I need to mix it up a little bit for a prolonged fight"

Or he had a "vengeance oath" and his super moves came online when enemies attacked his allies within his field of view.

Or he had to track the "tide of battle" and his super moves were usable against enemies who were a specific number of squares away from him at the beginning of his turn.

Or he had to "find an opening" and gained tokens he could spend on super moves when he missed an opponent or his opponents missed him.

Or he had to "build his fury" and special moves came online as his hit points dropped.

Or fucking anything. It doesn't matter whether you're spending charges, powering off, waiting for cool downs, or waiting for good draws, any resource system can be tweaked only slightly in order to make some sense for a swordsman to be using. It's not even difficult. You just think about what the basic playstyle and balance point you're looking for, and cram in a half-paragraph describing how it represents some combination of stamina, rage, hope, strength, cunning, and opportunity. Then it works for people.

Getting a resource system to "make sense" for Rogues and Knights is trivial, and the fact that the 4e team did not bother to even try to make it work says almost everything you need to know about 4e. Magicians don't even need that half paragraph, because "It's Magic" actually is a sufficient explanation for why magic has whatever resource management system it happens to have.

-Username17

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:34 pm

Seerow wrote:I don't think a Fighter having a resource to watch is a bad thing. I do think a Fighter with a daily resource is pretty retarded.

Why?

Seerow · Post by **Seerow** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:40 pm

OgreBattle wrote:
Seerow wrote:I don't think a Fighter having a resource to watch is a bad thing. I do think a Fighter with a daily resource is pretty retarded.
Why?

Because the answer to "Why can you only do that special move once per day?" is almost always "Game Balance" rather than anything that actually makes sense.

The way I've heard some 4e fans try to justify it is that the opening to use the move only presents itself once per day, but that's a pretty big stretch, I mean if I have one encounter that day I will always find the opening when I want it, but I can have 1000 more encounters that day and never see the opening again?

Encounter powers can be justified as "The enemy's already seen you do that they won't leave an opening for it again" but daily powers don't have that kind of leeway. There's nothing really that makes sense on a X/Day limit for a warrior type's special moves. The closest thing I could think of is if the moves caused fatigue/exhaustion, because once exhaustion sets in that's like an 8 hour deal to get rid of, and using something that causes it again knocks you unconscious iirc.

Leper · Post by **Leper** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:47 pm

FrankTrollman wrote:[some interesting stuff, followed by...]

Or fucking anything. It doesn't matter whether you're spending charges, powering off, waiting for cool downs, or waiting for good draws, any resource system can be tweaked only slightly in order to make some sense for a swordsman to be using. It's not even difficult. You just think about what the basic playstyle and balance point you're looking for, and cram in a half-paragraph describing how it represents some combination of stamina, rage, hope, strength, cunning, and opportunity. Then it works for people.

Except that disparately recharging resource systems invariably create disparate levels of power.

Frankly, I'm not saying "Daily" was a good choice. It was a shit choice, and most people know it--tying anything to something as arbitrary as how long a "day" is in actual plot time is going to cause some problems. It wasn't great when Gygax, Arneson, and Kaye did it, it was retarded when Monte and the gang rehashed it, and it was even more stupid when they carried it over into 4e instead of chucking it out because they'd had 30+ years to figure out just how badly that shit worked.

Getting a resource system to "make sense" for Rogues and Knights is trivial, and the fact that the 4e team did not bother to even try to make it work says almost everything you need to know about 4e.

Aside from my problems with the entirety of any "Daily" resource, I think it actually does make sense. It just doesn't make sense in the shitty way a lot of people were used to other shitty things making sense did.

Magicians don't even need that half paragraph, because "It's Magic" actually is a sufficient explanation for why magic has whatever resource management system it happens to have.

-Username17

Sure. It's also the laziest, lamest, most cop-out explanation available that has no more merit than I'm sure you'd ascribe to my justification of why 4e's resources are (somewhat) sensible.

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:17 pm

Leper wrote:Sure. It's also the laziest, lamest, most cop-out explanation available that has no more merit than I'm sure you'd ascribe to my justification of why 4e's resources are (somewhat) sensible.

It's always going to reduce to 'it's magic!' at some point if you try to explain some kind of phlebtonium without using technobabble. You can try to delay the inevitable by putting up thematic roadblocks like mental spell charges or lunar power or the ebb of the lifestream, but when people ask how those things work (or the things that make THOSE things work) you're going to have to use the 'it's magic!' cop-out sooner or later. And in fact the more you try to put it off the worse your game is going to be because you're wasting space on something that still, in the end, hasn't reduced to anything more plausible.

It's best just not to bring it up at all in the books and if someone on the boards or a con drills you on it just snark on them and ask for any example in fiction where it doesn't go 'it's magic!'. If they take the bait and provide a counter-example you can just needle them on the underlying mechanics for why such and such is such and such.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:23 pm

Leper wrote:
FrankTrollman wrote:[some interesting stuff, followed by...]

Or fucking anything. It doesn't matter whether you're spending charges, powering off, waiting for cool downs, or waiting for good draws, any resource system can be tweaked only slightly in order to make some sense for a swordsman to be using. It's not even difficult. You just think about what the basic playstyle and balance point you're looking for, and cram in a half-paragraph describing how it represents some combination of stamina, rage, hope, strength, cunning, and opportunity. Then it works for people.
Except that disparately recharging resource systems invariably create disparate levels of power.

Not necessarily. It will mean that different characters will respond differently to long or short encounters or adventuring days or something, but if you have it balanced for the "average" encounters and can clearly explain what kinds of characters win and lose from what kinds of deviations from the norm, the different recharge mechanisms can be an invaluable way for the DM to show some love to an underperforming character.

But the means that the classes recharge don't have to be different. They could all work on roughly the same system, it just has to be a system that is explainable for all the characters who use it. And that means explaining it for the Fighters, because as previously noted the Wizards can get by with absolutely any power recharge schedule because "It's Magic" is actually a sufficient explanation for why it works however it does.

Frankly, I'm not saying "Daily" was a good choice. It was a shit choice, and most people know it--tying anything to something as arbitrary as how long a "day" is in actual plot time is going to cause some problems. It wasn't great when Gygax, Arneson, and Kaye did it, it was retarded when Monte and the gang rehashed it, and it was even more stupid when they carried it over into 4e instead of chucking it out because they'd had 30+ years to figure out just how badly that shit worked.

Daily actually works perfectly fine for things that can be explained away as some form of exhaustion. As such, if all the Fighter Dailies were stances of some kind, people wouldn't really have a problem with it. The statement "I'm going to need to soak my feet and have a lie down before I do chicken stance again" actually works fine. People don't have a problem with that. It's when your dailies start including shit like "an attack exactly like your normal attack except that it does 9 more damage" that the "stamina" metaphor breaks down.

Meaning that actually the 4e Barbarian makes enough sense to not be insulting. All his dailies are him flying into weird totemic rages, so it's actually explicable why he can only do that a limited amount of times before falling asleep and eating a heavy meal. It's a little weird that he can do each type of rage exactly once, but you could even accept that with a little bit of handwaving about how they used different muscle groups and were mentally exhausting in different ways.

Aside from my problems with the entirety of any "Daily" resource, I think it actually does make sense. It just doesn't make sense in the shitty way a lot of people were used to other shitty things making sense did.

It's not that it couldn't be made to make sense, see the 4e Barbarian. It's that they didn't bother to make it make any sense.

There are problems with the Daily Resource Schedule - like how it encourages the five minute workday that many people find insulting. But it works just fine to represent power batteries, fatigue, or Batman utility belts. Anything that is clearly exhausting or which requires out of combat preparation can go on the "uses per day" paradigm and have that make as much sense as it matters.

-Username17

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:25 pm

I forgot to add, what's your background in terms of fantasy/action literature movies/etc?
The kind of stuff you'd be drawing inspiration for in your D&D games, and particularly for D&D warriors.

I figure there's some correlation with that and one's gut reaction to "fighter daily powers"

Seerow · Post by **Seerow** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:31 pm

OgreBattle wrote:I forgot to add, what's your background in terms of fantasy/action literature movies/etc?
The kind of stuff you'd be drawing inspiration for in your D&D games, and particularly for D&D warriors.

I figure there's some correlation with that and one's gut reaction to "fighter daily powers"

Out of curiosity, what Fantasy literature are you reading that makes Fighter Daily Powers plausible?

Anyway I read a lot of shit. The major series' are Wheel of Time, Midkemia/Kelewan, ASOIAF, LotR. I tend to stay away from D&D specific books, as I generally find I couldn't care less about the adventures of Drizzt or Elminster or whatever.

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:41 pm

Lago PARANOIA wrote:It's best just not to bring it up at all in the books and if someone on the boards or a con drills you on it just snark on them and ask for any example in fiction where it doesn't go 'it's magic!'. If they take the bait and provide a counter-example you can just needle them on the underlying mechanics for why such and such is such and such.

Why does gravity act as a force, particle, & characteristic of space-time and where does it come from?

It's magic.