Just some random thoughts. Free PDF or better yet comprehensive online SRD is a very sustainable model. Certainly works for Paizo. Let's face it, if you are going to run a game or even if you just really like it you'll buy the hardcover.

Scalable complexity. This would be brilliant. If you had a base combat resolution system that could be scaled up to the tactical grid based resolution of 3/4E it would go a long way to pulling the disparate factions of D&D together. I could totally see running a game where you use one system to resolve standard combats and another for the really important ones...

Quote from: Fiasco;500950This would be brilliant. If you had a base combat resolution system that could be scaled up to the tactical grid based resolution of 3/4E it would go a long way to pulling the disparate factions of D&D together. I could totally see running a game where you use one system to resolve standard combats and another for the really important ones...

I know GURPS did this (up to 3rd ed, anyway).  Does anyone know any GURPS groups?  How did it work in practice?  I'm familiar with GURPS but no one around ever played it so I have no idea what it's like in the wild, beyond rumours that even the line editor doesn't play anything recognizable as GURPs any more.

Quote from: Soylent Green;500934I'd take the D&D Rules Cyclopedia as starting point -  its a good book and I always preferred its simple iconic, classes to the class/race mix of AD&D.

I would streamline the rules a bit, make it more unified and take AC and Save from 3e for instance.

I would also do something to make the gameplay less attritional. The Vancian magic system, the resource management of hitpoints, healing spellls and potions are neither interesting nor heroic to me. And outside of the dungeon (or other situation where you can expect multiple encounters within a short space of time) it sort of gets in the way. To that effect I'd probably I'd replace the Vancian magic with a spell point system and make natural healing easier - maybe borrowing the concept of "reserves" from Omega World.

Also I'd add some sort of Hero Point mechanic. I personally feel all systems need some way to simulate those times a character is really motivated to put that extra bit of effort and oompf in what he does. It just seem crazy that regardless of whether you are trying to save your daughter or just your neighbour's pet turtle from a blazing fire you still roll the same D20 with the same exact odds.

That's the general picture. I'm pretty sure the fans would hate it and it would tank terribly, but when I do run D&D or the old TSR Gamma World that's the sort of spin I give it.

I'd do something similar with the following mods:

"Binary" skills as per 4e, SW Saga.
"Powers" similar to 4x but structured differently (utility take too long to use in combat, stance/aura you can use 2 of at a time tops, and everything else at will). You get one per level, your choice. Most have a race, class, or skill prereq.
Damage doesn't scale much with level. Hit points do, but there's a massive damage threshold that doesn't. Beyond the MDC, cool bonus crap happens (like lighting folks on fire).
Healing is unlimited, but utility.
"Strikers" focus on mobility or range coupled with status effects (they're meant to take out dangerous foes like mages). Mages would have area-of-effect strength. Defenders would be able to soak damage and handle groups in melee (there are ways to do this with less "aggro" esque mechanics)... nothing terribly dissimilar from 4e here, except in the handling (defenders having DR instead of high hp, for example).
Abilities would be a mix of new Gamma World and older D&D. Fixed high stats assigned by race/class combo, with everything else being random.

There might be other stuff, but that much I'm pretty sure of.

I really think building characters out of smaller chunks (as per 3+) and taking the tactical approach (as per 4+) are the cool parts of those respective editions, outside structural simplifications (like using D20 roll high across the board, or attacker always rolls vs static defense).

I don't know about the free PDF thing. It works for small press stuff because they need the publicity more than they need the money from the PDFs. As tablets & e-readers become more ubiquitous, the comparative utility of books vs PDFs weighs more in favor of PDFs. So I'd only give away the PDF if I could also afford to sell the book at cost. In other words, only if the text of the core rules is a pump-primer for other products such as modules, miniatures & battle mats, novels, comics, movies, toys, T-Shirts, coffee mugs, D&D-branded condoms, etc.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;500994I don't know about the free PDF thing. It works for small press stuff because they need the more than they need the money from the PDFs. As tablets & e-readers become more ubiquitous, the comparative utility of books vs PDFs weighs more in favor of PDFs. So I'd only give away the PDF if I could also afford to sell the book at cost. In other words, only if the text of the core rules is a pump-primer for other products such as modules, miniatures & battle mats, novels, comics, movies, toys, T-Shirts, coffee mugs, D&D-branded condoms, etc.

Personally, I think they would need to get their new edition in front of as many former customers as possible.  A free pdf would insure that most gamers, regardless of how put off they might have been with previous editions, would at least give it a look.

I think it's all brilliant.

A Free PDF would make it widely accessible IMHO, and would go a long ways towards unifying the edition camps.

I think going a step further, and making it OGL with a standard SRD so companies could expand the base as well, would be superb. Despite the general dislike of the OGL around here, I think the idea is a good one.

Quote from: trechriron;501002I think it's all brilliant.

A Free PDF would make it widely accessible IMHO, and would go a long ways towards unifying the edition camps.

I think going a step further, and making it OGL with a standard SRD so companies could expand the base as well, would be superb. Despite the general dislike of the OGL around here, I think the idea is a good one.

SRD would be a must-have.  

Also, it would be great to see company-produced videos on how to actually play the game.  Show people that it is both possible and fun, instead of a chore for socially-inept nerds.

 For example, there are tons of videos on Youtube that show how to play Warhammer's wargames...and these go a whole lot further in making the game look approachable and entertaining than reading the dry rulebook does.

Right, I don't think the OGL really hurt D&D until WotC themselves decided to deliberately make their game incompatible with it, at which point they found they couldn't simply bury the old edition.

I don't think the OGL is generally disliked here, but whatever, it's a good point. Possibly they shouldn't make the PDF all pretty and all.

Whether they should re-embrace the OGL is another good question. Again, I don't think anyone really moved strongly into D&D's territory until WotC abandoned it themselves. If OGLifying and returning to something like the D20 license can bring 3rd party publishers on board, sure, why not? The only problem is that IMO the model of making your money via forced upgrades of core books has been repudiated. That means that, going forward, WotC would have to compete with those same 3rd parties in the area of supplements. Can they?

Anyway ultimately the question is, if they give away the text of the rules, what exactly are they going to sell? They need to have really compelling add-ons beyond just the text, and I don't think a printed version of the core book (or a "nice" PDF) will offer that much marginal value, even compared to a barebones PDF, as time goes on.

If I owned it free and clear:

Simplified rules, along the lines of Castles and Crusades, but with a decent yet simple skill system.

$5 PDF. Make some money off of this, but also it's cheap enough that most gamers will buy it.

OGL, except for the trademarked stuff like beholders and githyanki.

Forgotten Realms as the only setting. The 4e version never happened. Set it 10 years after the last 3e book. No massive earthquakes. No death of Mystra or other gods, etc. Make sure people don't need all of the 2e/3e books to run it, though.

Maybe lease the other old settings to other publishers, similar to how it was done with Ravenloft and White Wolf.

Give Paizo the option to restart Dragon and Dungeon magazines in print.

Advertise the heck out of the game on Cartoon Network and other channels frequented by the target customer base.

Quote from: misterguignol;500857- the core book (and it would be one book instead of the usual 3-book split) would be available as a free pdf download from the D&D website.  The came would be simplified; the complexities introduced in 3e and 4e would be stripped away.  The core book would also available in hardcover for people who like books as physical objects at the table.

I'm on record elsewhere as saying that, if I were in charge of WotC, I would shelve 5E and stick with 4E. I don't see a winning angle for 5E. But if a 5E were mandated and I was in charge of it...

- I would go one step further and also strip away the complexities of AD&D.

- I'd use a stripped-down 3E as my design base for this (think Legends & Labyrinths), but do some heavy revision. Notably, I'd make sure that everybody got high-level toys (not just the spellcasters).

- I'd look to the OSR and reintroduce game structures that have been slowly stripped out of the game for the past 30 years.

- I'd look to 4E and pull page 42 and easier monster stat block creation.

- The core of the D&D line would look something like this. Boxed sets that look like games and are sold as games.

- I would re-introduce the AD&D brand name to produce a Player's Handbook, a Dungeon Master's Guide, and a Monster Manual. These would be 100% compatible with the D&D product line. (If you've got a D&D module, you can run it in AD&D without conversion. If you create a monster with AD&D, you can run it in D&D. If you've got a D&D character, you can start using the AD&D character creation rules any time you level up. And so forth.)

- Theoretically, I'm hoping that I can buck the burnout pattern of the supplement treadmill by locking adventure content, rule content, and physical goodie content together into the boxed sets. If that doesn't pan out, I'll just turn the boxed sets into limited editions and cycle them out of print. (Maybe, like Disney, I'll bring them back into print every seven years.)

- Meanwhile, I'd go back to Dancey's concept of "evergreen" products and try to make it work by focusing my actual supplement line on opening up new game structures. For example, I wouldn't produce a book of "rules for ships". Rules for ships are worthless unless you have a game structure that involves being on ships. What needs to be developed is a game structure for "being pirates" that's as effective as the game structure for "being dungeoncrawlers". Pull that off successfully and you'll have created an entirely new market for adventure products.

- I would probably do everything in my power to avoid publishing splatbooks like Complete Warrior or Arcane Power. These books are not only the metastatic cancer of the supplement treadmill, but they make it actively more difficult for people to embrace non-"core" classes because the non-core classes never receive the same support. I'd rather have people reach for new experiences rather than glutting and then sating themselves on the supplement treadmill for fighters and wizards.

- Bring back the OGL if the legal department will let me get away with it.

So, to sum up:

(1) Classic D&D gameplay. BECMI-style simplicity in a series of rotating box sets that is 100% compatible with the AD&D PHB/DMG/MM trio (which provides the more advanced options and detailed bits that experienced players can't live without).

(2) The actual product line is kept tight: The rotating boxed sets. The AD&D core books. And a series of AD&D evergreen books each aimed at opening up a new campaign structure.

(3) Additional support through DDI. Notably, a complete adventure path (or adventure path equivalent) each year. (Which means we're producing two full adventure paths for the game each year.)

Quote from: Rincewind1;500866Why? I'd love nothing more then rules how to convert creatures from MtG cards, and guidelines how to use random set of cards to set up a whole scenario.

The former is meaningless. (The conversion guidelines would necessarily be "take the picture and make up some stats for it"; there's nothing in common between how MtG stats up a creature and how an RPG stats up a creature.)

The latter is probably best served as an article in Dragon. It's no better or worse than a dozen other random idea seeds.

With that being said, I certainly do think there is a lot of merit in the idea of leveraging the MtG IP into D&D. The MtG setting(s) are pretty awesome and I think WotC's fear of a backlash is probably a decade out of date at this point.

Hardcopy  core rules sales should be profitable even with free PDF. If want to play the game you will want the Hardcopy.

Quote from: Soylent Green;500934I

That's the general picture. I'm pretty sure the fans would hate it and it would tank terribly, but when I do run D&D or the old TSR Gamma World that's the sort of spin I give it.

I might spin it a little differently, but I like the general outline.

I'd have a complete core book. All classes, all races. While I like the "fixed" elements of D&D's Cyclopedia, I realize that its not hard to expand "Elf" to "Elf Wizard" or "Elf Fighter" and so on.

All races get one +2 stat. No minuses. All races get 1 special "boon" which can be a big additional thing or several balanced small things. Elves get Starlight Vision, and +1 bonus to Magical effects. Dwarves get Darkvision, and something else from their classic D&D traits.

Skills exist but are just a +2 bonus to an attribute check on d20. Skills are simple, but robust things that let you do non combat/magic things.


Spellcasting isn't point based. Its a check. Period. You roll stat+level+D20 vs the casting Difficulty number. That's it. If a sword can be swung all day you can fling magic. Of course the harder spells take longer to focus, and have much higher numbers.

Fighters get "Feats" similar to Weapon Mastery Abilities, but based on level, weapon choice, and a die roll 1d20+stat bonus+level to do things like entangle, trip, cut arrows from the air, etc. These bonuses are ONLY doable with a Fighter class. Thieves get similar but alternate "special tricks," of a more deceptive and criminal nature. Leaping from the Shadows, Throwing blinding powder in a foes face, rolling with the blow. Masters of Agility and Stealth.

Classes: 4. Fighter, Cleric, Wizard, Thief. Anything else comes from multiclassing in some way. Most special abilities fall under skills with a few Magic ones (Curing Hands, Shapeshifting) coming with an earned title/subclass "Paladin" "Druid"  You play as a neutral cleric--you get to 3rd level? You can pick up the Druid Title, instead of Noviate. Get Druid stuff. Get to 3rd Level Fighter? Get Ranger. and so on.

This lets simple character aspects be learned before more complex ones for new players. It also allows "in character" play to impact your more subtle class differences. (Fighters joining a Clerical order, and becoming Paladins. Thieve relying on entertaining skills to become Bards. Etc.)

Otherwise it be mostly the Cyclopedia with hopefully subtle changes.

I'd settle for 3e with fixed math and nerfed spellcasters.

Quote from: Rincewind1;500859Add settings from Magic the Gathering.

Add rules how to combine MtG cards with DnD.

Riiiiight...because I want to have to learn M:tG in order to play D&D now...as if the game wasn't already a wet dream for people with Asperger's.