Not sure I'd like class gating like that. The arcane trickster shouldn't be held back by the street thug. I'd rather just limit a rogue's Expertise to rogue skills, with maybe 1-2 added to that list based on your subclass.
Additionally, the example given is a bit disingenuous because the rogue needs to get Arcana from somewhere, so they're a Sage or something as well. A boilerplate rogue can't even be proficient in Arcana.
And finally, the concept that a Wizard has no in-class way to gain expertise or otherwise specialize in knowledge skills is a gap that should be filled.
I also enjoy 5e, although my group is exploring other directions due to 5e being a bit more restrictive than the games we were used to. I am excited for the focus on exploration in TCoE.
But combat in 5e is definitely a bit more boring than older editions, controlling for the skill of the DM. It's also really sad that although weaknesses are a mechanic, almost no monsters have one, making the BPS damage types nearly 100% interchangeable. On the other hand, almost every dragon in 3e was vulnerable to their opposed damage type, etc. And aside from the mythic traits from Theros, monsters aren't really dynamic by design. In 4e, many monsters had abilities that trigger on being reduced to half their HP or lower, while in 5e, characters and monsters are equally as able at full hp and at 1 hp. The way combat tends to work in 5e is that the barbarian/fighter/paladin immediately engages in melee, and is locked in place due to the threat of AoOs. The rogue/monk/melee ranger just bounces in and out, and everybody else just picks a spot and stays there.
In a hypothetical 6e, I'd like to see more of the options of earlier editions be incorporated as core mechanics. 4e had many abilities that push, slide, and teleport, making defenders more mobile. Marking created pressure in melee, and defenders had lots of abilities that rely on marks, unlike in 5e in which the cavalier (!?!) is the only subclass that does something similar. A mark option is included in the DMG Ch. 9, but it isn't analogous to the 4e mechanic--it just reinforces AoO threat-locks. Grappling, although much simpler, is difficult to justify tactically without a niche build. Sundering is absent and disarming and tumbling are almost never used, likewise banished to the DMG.
I'd also like to see a bit more structure on social encounters. Chapter 8 of the DMG provides some tips about how to do so using attitudes (friendly, indifferent, and hostile) but AFAIK the framework is not explored further. I'm actually thinking of creating a subclass entirely focused on social encounters, using the attitude mechanic, just as a proof of concept.
Not sure I'd like class gating like that. The arcane trickster shouldn't be held back by the street thug. I'd rather just limit a rogue's Expertise to rogue skills, with maybe 1-2 added to that list based on your subclass.
Additionally, the example given is a bit disingenuous because the rogue needs to get Arcana from somewhere, so they're a Sage or something as well. A boilerplate rogue can't even be proficient in Arcana.
And finally, the concept that a Wizard has no in-class way to gain expertise or otherwise specialize in knowledge skills is a gap that should be filled.
Amazing. I agree with everything you've said. The latter point is one of the weaknesses of abandoning a skill point system for an all or nothing proficiency system. I think PF2 actually has an interesting mid-ground in the form of a few levels of proficiency. I don't have an opinion yet, but it's worth checking out.
So a few days back Wizards changed their "main article" link from Rime of the FrostMaiden to Tasha's Cauldron of Everthing. Something I found of note on Wizards' Tasha page might be useful for those trying to discern a potential 6e timeline. At the bottom of the page there's a row of "You May Also Like" listing the core rules plus Xanthar's (which many I think consider a "core rule" book. The core books were released from August to December 2014. Xanthar's November 2017. Tasha's, in the mold of Xanthar's but with some relatively more radical or liberating options to character generation, comes out November 2020. It's not enough to declare a pattern, but there's a trend of Wizards putting out it's 5e core and "most core adjacent' books in the Fall (timed for the Christmas market I'm guessing). If this does stick as a pattern, that means we should see "something" in Fall 2023. I speculate it would be one of two things:
1.) Wizards begins a "Where do we go from here?" conversation with the community, noting that specific setting books aside there are five hardcovers from which most players draw their rules, and they want to take the magic of those five books and distill it back into two or three again. This will lead to either a 6e, or a Golden edition (as suggested elsewhere here) or what have you.
2.) Tasha's is actually an explicit or stealth launch of that conversation. The alternate origin/legacy/race system to what's presented in the PHB is a catalyst to see how the game community will react. In the end, I'd see a 6e/Ge or consolidated edition where the freedom granted in origin/legacy/race freedom and class variant options being presented as the "core system" with the races and classes of the PHB being presented as templates to guide new players and DMs before playing with the ingredients themselves.
Just a half thought I had during a morning coffee perusal of Wizards site, figured I'd throw it in here.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
So a few days back Wizards changed their "main article" link from Rime of the FrostMaiden to Tasha's Cauldron of Everthing. Something I found of note on Wizards' Tasha page might be useful for those trying to discern a potential 6e timeline. At the bottom of the page there's a row of "You May Also Like" listing the core rules plus Xanthar's (which many I think consider a "core rule" book. The core books were released from August to December 2014. Xanthar's November 2017. Tasha's, in the mold of Xanthar's but with some relatively more radical or liberating options to character generation, comes out November 2020. It's not enough to declare a pattern, but there's a trend of Wizards putting out it's 5e core and "most core adjacent' books in the Fall (timed for the Christmas market I'm guessing). If this does stick as a pattern, that means we should see "something" in Fall 2023. I speculate it would be one of two things:
1.) Wizards begins a "Where do we go from here?" conversation with the community, noting that specific setting books aside there are five hardcovers from which most players draw their rules, and they want to take the magic of those five books and distill it back into two or three again. This will lead to either a 6e, or a Golden edition (as suggested elsewhere here) or what have you.
2.) Tasha's is actually an explicit or stealth launch of that conversation. The alternate origin/legacy/race system to what's presented in the PHB is a catalyst to see how the game community will react. In the end, I'd see a 6e/Ge or consolidated edition where the freedom granted in origin/legacy/race freedom and class variant options being presented as the "core system" with the races and classes of the PHB being presented as templates to guide new players and DMs before playing with the ingredients themselves.
Just a half thought I had during a morning coffee perusal of Wizards site, figured I'd throw it in here.
Tasha's basically is a minor edition change (not major, more Akin to going from 3e to 3.5e or from 4e to 4e Essentials, then from 2e to 3e or 4e to 5e).
If it's popular that likely means at least 4 or 5 more years of 5e. Maybe more.
Instead of creating renewal via major edition change for now, they are doubling down on setting books, in a kind of mirror to how MtG releases sets of cards visiting different locations (next year alone they are releasing card sets for Kaldheim, Strixhaven, Forgotten Realms, Innistrad, and sort of Dominaria in MtG). For D&D in 2021 I expect we will get setting books for Zendikar, Forgotten Realms, Innistrad/Ravenloft, and maybe Spelljammer.
Tasha's basically is a minor edition change (not major, more Akin to going from 3e to 3.5e or from 4e to 4e Essentials, then from 2e to 3e or 4e to 5e).
If it's popular that likely means at least 4 or 5 more years of 5e. Maybe more.
Instead of creating renewal via major edition change for now, they are doubling down on setting books, in a kind of mirror to how MtG releases sets of cards visiting different locations (next year alone they are releasing card sets for Kaldheim, Strixhaven, Forgotten Realms, Innistrad, and sort of Dominaria in MtG). For D&D in 2021 I expect we will get setting books for Zendikar, Forgotten Realms, Innistrad/Ravenloft, and maybe Spelljammer.
There's a whole lot of thread elsewhere on this forum on Wizards of the Coast saying at their celebration event that "three Classic" setting will be revisited in 2021-2022, as well as Magic the Gathering content and a few other things like some "anthologies" which will give new designers more exposure and test the market for ideas before diving into full hardback support for those ideas.
I agree that Tasha's could be understood as a 5.25 edition, The PHB, DMG, MM are going to stay as they as the "entry products" with the Tasha's options for generation available, I don't see a PHB revision coming out until maybe the end of the three year window I suggested. Yes, AL is embracing the change, but you can still build the stock race models presented in PHB. I do like an earlier comment talking about a "Golden Edition" in stead of a 6E to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the game, which would sort of reconcile or recompile the best of the present RAW and the innovations presented in Tasha's and other potential products down the pipeline.
Tasha's basically is a minor edition change (not major, more Akin to going from 3e to 3.5e or from 4e to 4e Essentials, then from 2e to 3e or 4e to 5e).
If it's popular that likely means at least 4 or 5 more years of 5e. Maybe more.
Instead of creating renewal via major edition change for now, they are doubling down on setting books, in a kind of mirror to how MtG releases sets of cards visiting different locations (next year alone they are releasing card sets for Kaldheim, Strixhaven, Forgotten Realms, Innistrad, and sort of Dominaria in MtG). For D&D in 2021 I expect we will get setting books for Zendikar, Forgotten Realms, Innistrad/Ravenloft, and maybe Spelljammer.
There's a whole lot of thread elsewhere on this forum on Wizards of the Coast saying at their celebration event that "three Classic" setting will be revisited in 2021-2022, as well as Magic the Gathering content and a few other things like some "anthologies" which will give new designers more exposure and test the market for ideas before diving into full hardback support for those ideas.
I agree that Tasha's could be understood as a 5.25 edition, The PHB, DMG, MM are going to stay as they as the "entry products" with the Tasha's options for generation available, I don't see a PHB revision coming out until maybe the end of the three year window I suggested. Yes, AL is embracing the change, but you can still build the stock race models presented in PHB. I do like an earlier comment talking about a "Golden Edition" in stead of a 6E to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the game, which would sort of reconcile or recompile the best of the present RAW and the innovations presented in Tasha's and other potential products down the pipeline.
So an expanded PHB will a collection of refined rules found else where added to it. That could he interesting.
So if any of you know of the Great and and all Wisened James M. Ward, he has been running a Gary Gygax style campaign on twitch with other Authors. It has been a hoot. I still think THAC0 was the best and watching this just brings back great memories of it, Hopefully 6e will bring it back.
But alas, we need to get a 5.5 first and I think Tasha's might be the start of that movement.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I just want to tell everyone "happy gaming" and actually mean it. Whatever your game is, just have fun with it, it is after all, just a game.
Bringing THAC0 back would kill the game. It was a bad, counter-intuitive mechanic that was tolerated at the time because back then tabletop RPGs were a niche hobby that was expected to have such things. In a modern RPG, such a game mechanic would not be nearly as well received and it would cause a lot of people to ignore that edition in favor of playing different games that didn't have such things.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure Tasha's will not be a return to Gygax style D&D. I mean the true "old school" RAW you started had little more than aspirations as a first level player. With 5e and the expanded or liberated origins options anticipated in Tasha's, players can hit the ground running with a character closer to what they want to play at the onset, rather than grind your first level character up to the character you want to play (if you survive). They're very different play ethos.
Again, following on someone's "gold edition" idea, if Tasha's is well received, I can see an edition that merges the options of Tasha's with the present RAW in a PHB. It starts by explaining all the options for race/legacy/lineage as well as the varieties within classes. After that overview, it would provide "templates" consisting of the existing PHB (and other sources) races and classes as models for how races and classes could be build, available to those who don't want to get as under the hood as building your own lineage and classes, and with that reorientation 5e+T becomes another stable edition for about a decade. I don't have anything invested in this thinking, it just seems like a possible logic.
I don't think 6e will be for a while. The developers playtested 5e a lot, and it shows - the mechanics are much more approachable for new gamers than the complexity of something like 3.5 or the inconsistency of earlier editions. The popularity of Critical Role and the spurt of online RPGs during COVID lockdown seems to have skyrocketed their popularity, too. Has it hit a peak? It's impossible to tell, but the visibility of DnD content on Reddit and Youtube would have been very surprising 10 years ago. The mixed reaction to 4e meant Pathfinder was taking away a bit of their core fanbase for a while there, and 5th seemed to a win a lot of them back.
I DM'd a 5e session for an OSRIC guy twice my age from another country and he grasped the gist of the rules almost instantly. That shows an impressive skeletal design which Wizards can flesh out using supplements and so on for money. They're also trying hard to be a bit more "inclusive" than the old stereotype of a DnD player, which increases the fanbase. Brand recognition is a big thing in a hobby industry where people need to invest a lot of time, and DnD pretty much blows every other tRPG out of the ballpark for now, it would be a bad decision for them to release a 6e soon and not milk this edition while it's fresh. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I still wouldn't mind a 5.5e or something coming out in the next few years. It worked for third.
It only worked for 3rd because there were major issues with 3rd and even then it was massively controversial.
3rd was still a tremendous improvement over 2e in many ways. 3.5 had a lot of problems too, hence Pathfinder, but most players just adapted to them. Hell, you still get diehard 3.5 loyalists now, whereas 4th is very niche.
I think 5e is a lot more refined that previous editions but that doesn't mean there aren't improvements to be made, whether in the form of a 5.5e or a 6th. 5.5 also might extend the "shelf life" of 5th - difference being most of their splat would probably remain compatible or able to be reprinted with minor edits. The safe move for now seems to just make more supplements, but that means in the medium-long term feature creep will inevitable set in, and interest in any game eventually wanes.
What then? They can either 1) Abandon D&D entirely... not a smart move for the biggest RPG out there. Or 2) Remake the tried-and-true 5e model with shinier wheels - either as 5.5 or a 6e which is very close to 5e - which will provoke some complaints but most likely make them money, rekindle interest for a while, and fix some issues with the game for players. Or 3) Make a 6th edition system which is radically different from the predecessor. A big risk considering 4e tried that. Once they've hit the gravy train a shift in any direction for the system could split the base, unless they want to go back to the 1e model of having two versions of the game. Or perhaps a shift towards highly modular rulesets.
If software like GPT-3 ends up being refined and used to script VR in real time, I could see D&D becoming something completely unrecognizable in 10-20 years. Like a really immersive version of scribblenauts. Seems like we're already seeing digital tabletops outpace kitchen play.
As for what I'd like to see in 6th edition, I dig the rules-lite direction 5e took, and more flexibility would be nice. Other RPGs have elegant mechanics for players to invent their own skills, classes. races, and spells as a core part of the game. 5e has this too but it's a bit awkward and I'd like to see it streamlined as part of PC creation/advancement. It would add a lot to roleplay.
No idea but i do hope they make some serious changes.
The first bringing back all the classes and prestige classes of 3.0 and 3.5
The second is making feat character level dependent and class level dependent
the third is keeping all the saves and the core dice rules of 5th
fourth allowing for 1 ability score improvement every 4 levels and a feat at 1st, 3rd, and every third level after. adding back all the feats of 3.0 and 3.5 up to epic level
fifth uncapping ability scores, skills, and reducing proficiency bonuses.
sixth bring back all the skills of 3.5 and keeping all the saves of 5e but keeping the saves tied to the class level
Basically 3.0, 3.5 and 5e blended together giving the player all the customization option of 3.0/3.5 and the simplicity of rules from 5e, with a couple of things still being kept for characters like sorcerer points and smites use spell slots as an example. example while every character can use metamagic as a feat like in 3.5 only the sorcerer as has sorcerer points that would benefit this. example multiclassing would be more diverse with classes like animal lord, beast master, servant of pelor, and unseen hand, wu jen, and elemental savant and with feats like beast totem, servant of heaven, and vengeful spirit. Bringing back prerequisites for classes and feats as well. and for certain class of the divine domains should be feats with the cleric being allowed two domains for free and a third by forsaking another domain also each domain should grant supernatural abilities.
No. About 90 percent of everything published in 3rd edition was filler that got shoveled out without playtesting. We do not need to go back to having eight million prestige classes, seven point nine nine nine nine of which are useless, because Wizards needs to fill splatbooks. We also don't need to go back to the days of unbound numeric values such that is was impossible to make a saving throw against something that targets your weak ability score, or to having dozens of hyper-specialized feats and skills that also were useful in roughly one encounter per campaign if the GM actually went out of their way to rig things so you could use them.
Or you give the 3.0 / 3.5 throwback hunger over to whatever ENWorld is doing with their "crunchy" overlay purportedly forthcoming or in some stage of development.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Not sure I'd like class gating like that. The arcane trickster shouldn't be held back by the street thug. I'd rather just limit a rogue's Expertise to rogue skills, with maybe 1-2 added to that list based on your subclass.
Additionally, the example given is a bit disingenuous because the rogue needs to get Arcana from somewhere, so they're a Sage or something as well. A boilerplate rogue can't even be proficient in Arcana.
And finally, the concept that a Wizard has no in-class way to gain expertise or otherwise specialize in knowledge skills is a gap that should be filled.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I'm quite enjoying 5e.
"Life is not a problem to be solved but a reality to be experienced"- Soren Kierkgaard
I also enjoy 5e, although my group is exploring other directions due to 5e being a bit more restrictive than the games we were used to. I am excited for the focus on exploration in TCoE.
But combat in 5e is definitely a bit more boring than older editions, controlling for the skill of the DM. It's also really sad that although weaknesses are a mechanic, almost no monsters have one, making the BPS damage types nearly 100% interchangeable. On the other hand, almost every dragon in 3e was vulnerable to their opposed damage type, etc. And aside from the mythic traits from Theros, monsters aren't really dynamic by design. In 4e, many monsters had abilities that trigger on being reduced to half their HP or lower, while in 5e, characters and monsters are equally as able at full hp and at 1 hp. The way combat tends to work in 5e is that the barbarian/fighter/paladin immediately engages in melee, and is locked in place due to the threat of AoOs. The rogue/monk/melee ranger just bounces in and out, and everybody else just picks a spot and stays there.
In a hypothetical 6e, I'd like to see more of the options of earlier editions be incorporated as core mechanics. 4e had many abilities that push, slide, and teleport, making defenders more mobile. Marking created pressure in melee, and defenders had lots of abilities that rely on marks, unlike in 5e in which the cavalier (!?!) is the only subclass that does something similar. A mark option is included in the DMG Ch. 9, but it isn't analogous to the 4e mechanic--it just reinforces AoO threat-locks. Grappling, although much simpler, is difficult to justify tactically without a niche build. Sundering is absent and disarming and tumbling are almost never used, likewise banished to the DMG.
I'd also like to see a bit more structure on social encounters. Chapter 8 of the DMG provides some tips about how to do so using attitudes (friendly, indifferent, and hostile) but AFAIK the framework is not explored further. I'm actually thinking of creating a subclass entirely focused on social encounters, using the attitude mechanic, just as a proof of concept.
Amazing. I agree with everything you've said. The latter point is one of the weaknesses of abandoning a skill point system for an all or nothing proficiency system. I think PF2 actually has an interesting mid-ground in the form of a few levels of proficiency. I don't have an opinion yet, but it's worth checking out.
So a few days back Wizards changed their "main article" link from Rime of the FrostMaiden to Tasha's Cauldron of Everthing. Something I found of note on Wizards' Tasha page might be useful for those trying to discern a potential 6e timeline. At the bottom of the page there's a row of "You May Also Like" listing the core rules plus Xanthar's (which many I think consider a "core rule" book. The core books were released from August to December 2014. Xanthar's November 2017. Tasha's, in the mold of Xanthar's but with some relatively more radical or liberating options to character generation, comes out November 2020. It's not enough to declare a pattern, but there's a trend of Wizards putting out it's 5e core and "most core adjacent' books in the Fall (timed for the Christmas market I'm guessing). If this does stick as a pattern, that means we should see "something" in Fall 2023. I speculate it would be one of two things:
1.) Wizards begins a "Where do we go from here?" conversation with the community, noting that specific setting books aside there are five hardcovers from which most players draw their rules, and they want to take the magic of those five books and distill it back into two or three again. This will lead to either a 6e, or a Golden edition (as suggested elsewhere here) or what have you.
2.) Tasha's is actually an explicit or stealth launch of that conversation. The alternate origin/legacy/race system to what's presented in the PHB is a catalyst to see how the game community will react. In the end, I'd see a 6e/Ge or consolidated edition where the freedom granted in origin/legacy/race freedom and class variant options being presented as the "core system" with the races and classes of the PHB being presented as templates to guide new players and DMs before playing with the ingredients themselves.
Just a half thought I had during a morning coffee perusal of Wizards site, figured I'd throw it in here.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Hear Hear,
Just invested quite some money (and time!) in DND 5E and I do really enjoy it.
Tasha's basically is a minor edition change (not major, more Akin to going from 3e to 3.5e or from 4e to 4e Essentials, then from 2e to 3e or 4e to 5e).
If it's popular that likely means at least 4 or 5 more years of 5e. Maybe more.
Instead of creating renewal via major edition change for now, they are doubling down on setting books, in a kind of mirror to how MtG releases sets of cards visiting different locations (next year alone they are releasing card sets for Kaldheim, Strixhaven, Forgotten Realms, Innistrad, and sort of Dominaria in MtG). For D&D in 2021 I expect we will get setting books for Zendikar, Forgotten Realms, Innistrad/Ravenloft, and maybe Spelljammer.
There's a whole lot of thread elsewhere on this forum on Wizards of the Coast saying at their celebration event that "three Classic" setting will be revisited in 2021-2022, as well as Magic the Gathering content and a few other things like some "anthologies" which will give new designers more exposure and test the market for ideas before diving into full hardback support for those ideas.
I agree that Tasha's could be understood as a 5.25 edition, The PHB, DMG, MM are going to stay as they as the "entry products" with the Tasha's options for generation available, I don't see a PHB revision coming out until maybe the end of the three year window I suggested. Yes, AL is embracing the change, but you can still build the stock race models presented in PHB. I do like an earlier comment talking about a "Golden Edition" in stead of a 6E to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the game, which would sort of reconcile or recompile the best of the present RAW and the innovations presented in Tasha's and other potential products down the pipeline.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
So an expanded PHB will a collection of refined rules found else where added to it. That could he interesting.
So if any of you know of the Great and and all Wisened James M. Ward, he has been running a Gary Gygax style campaign on twitch with other Authors. It has been a hoot. I still think THAC0 was the best and watching this just brings back great memories of it, Hopefully 6e will bring it back.
But alas, we need to get a 5.5 first and I think Tasha's might be the start of that movement.
I just want to tell everyone "happy gaming" and actually mean it. Whatever your game is, just have fun with it, it is after all, just a game.
Bringing THAC0 back would kill the game. It was a bad, counter-intuitive mechanic that was tolerated at the time because back then tabletop RPGs were a niche hobby that was expected to have such things. In a modern RPG, such a game mechanic would not be nearly as well received and it would cause a lot of people to ignore that edition in favor of playing different games that didn't have such things.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure Tasha's will not be a return to Gygax style D&D. I mean the true "old school" RAW you started had little more than aspirations as a first level player. With 5e and the expanded or liberated origins options anticipated in Tasha's, players can hit the ground running with a character closer to what they want to play at the onset, rather than grind your first level character up to the character you want to play (if you survive). They're very different play ethos.
Again, following on someone's "gold edition" idea, if Tasha's is well received, I can see an edition that merges the options of Tasha's with the present RAW in a PHB. It starts by explaining all the options for race/legacy/lineage as well as the varieties within classes. After that overview, it would provide "templates" consisting of the existing PHB (and other sources) races and classes as models for how races and classes could be build, available to those who don't want to get as under the hood as building your own lineage and classes, and with that reorientation 5e+T becomes another stable edition for about a decade. I don't have anything invested in this thinking, it just seems like a possible logic.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I don't think 6e will be for a while. The developers playtested 5e a lot, and it shows - the mechanics are much more approachable for new gamers than the complexity of something like 3.5 or the inconsistency of earlier editions. The popularity of Critical Role and the spurt of online RPGs during COVID lockdown seems to have skyrocketed their popularity, too. Has it hit a peak? It's impossible to tell, but the visibility of DnD content on Reddit and Youtube would have been very surprising 10 years ago. The mixed reaction to 4e meant Pathfinder was taking away a bit of their core fanbase for a while there, and 5th seemed to a win a lot of them back.
I DM'd a 5e session for an OSRIC guy twice my age from another country and he grasped the gist of the rules almost instantly. That shows an impressive skeletal design which Wizards can flesh out using supplements and so on for money. They're also trying hard to be a bit more "inclusive" than the old stereotype of a DnD player, which increases the fanbase. Brand recognition is a big thing in a hobby industry where people need to invest a lot of time, and DnD pretty much blows every other tRPG out of the ballpark for now, it would be a bad decision for them to release a 6e soon and not milk this edition while it's fresh. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I still wouldn't mind a 5.5e or something coming out in the next few years. It worked for third.
3rd was still a tremendous improvement over 2e in many ways. 3.5 had a lot of problems too, hence Pathfinder, but most players just adapted to them. Hell, you still get diehard 3.5 loyalists now, whereas 4th is very niche.
I think 5e is a lot more refined that previous editions but that doesn't mean there aren't improvements to be made, whether in the form of a 5.5e or a 6th. 5.5 also might extend the "shelf life" of 5th - difference being most of their splat would probably remain compatible or able to be reprinted with minor edits. The safe move for now seems to just make more supplements, but that means in the medium-long term feature creep will inevitable set in, and interest in any game eventually wanes.
What then? They can either 1) Abandon D&D entirely... not a smart move for the biggest RPG out there. Or 2) Remake the tried-and-true 5e model with shinier wheels - either as 5.5 or a 6e which is very close to 5e - which will provoke some complaints but most likely make them money, rekindle interest for a while, and fix some issues with the game for players. Or 3) Make a 6th edition system which is radically different from the predecessor. A big risk considering 4e tried that. Once they've hit the gravy train a shift in any direction for the system could split the base, unless they want to go back to the 1e model of having two versions of the game. Or perhaps a shift towards highly modular rulesets.
If software like GPT-3 ends up being refined and used to script VR in real time, I could see D&D becoming something completely unrecognizable in 10-20 years. Like a really immersive version of scribblenauts. Seems like we're already seeing digital tabletops outpace kitchen play.
As for what I'd like to see in 6th edition, I dig the rules-lite direction 5e took, and more flexibility would be nice. Other RPGs have elegant mechanics for players to invent their own skills, classes. races, and spells as a core part of the game. 5e has this too but it's a bit awkward and I'd like to see it streamlined as part of PC creation/advancement. It would add a lot to roleplay.
6e will be released on the 25th July 2021.
Yeah, no. It definitely will not be.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
No idea but i do hope they make some serious changes.
The first bringing back all the classes and prestige classes of 3.0 and 3.5
The second is making feat character level dependent and class level dependent
the third is keeping all the saves and the core dice rules of 5th
fourth allowing for 1 ability score improvement every 4 levels and a feat at 1st, 3rd, and every third level after. adding back all the feats of 3.0 and 3.5 up to epic level
fifth uncapping ability scores, skills, and reducing proficiency bonuses.
sixth bring back all the skills of 3.5 and keeping all the saves of 5e but keeping the saves tied to the class level
Basically 3.0, 3.5 and 5e blended together giving the player all the customization option of 3.0/3.5 and the simplicity of rules from 5e, with a couple of things still being kept for characters like sorcerer points and smites use spell slots as an example. example while every character can use metamagic as a feat like in 3.5 only the sorcerer as has sorcerer points that would benefit this. example multiclassing would be more diverse with classes like animal lord, beast master, servant of pelor, and unseen hand, wu jen, and elemental savant and with feats like beast totem, servant of heaven, and vengeful spirit. Bringing back prerequisites for classes and feats as well. and for certain class of the divine domains should be feats with the cleric being allowed two domains for free and a third by forsaking another domain also each domain should grant supernatural abilities.
No. About 90 percent of everything published in 3rd edition was filler that got shoveled out without playtesting. We do not need to go back to having eight million prestige classes, seven point nine nine nine nine of which are useless, because Wizards needs to fill splatbooks. We also don't need to go back to the days of unbound numeric values such that is was impossible to make a saving throw against something that targets your weak ability score, or to having dozens of hyper-specialized feats and skills that also were useful in roughly one encounter per campaign if the GM actually went out of their way to rig things so you could use them.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Or you give the 3.0 / 3.5 throwback hunger over to whatever ENWorld is doing with their "crunchy" overlay purportedly forthcoming or in some stage of development.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I gotta say I’m not a fan of the ENWorld product. I didn’t like a lot of what they did from what I remember.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Uh... Where did you hear that? They have announced nothing of the sort, and 5e is still very popular, and gaining in popularity.
I am an average mathematics enjoyer.
>Extended Signature<