Quote from: thedungeondelver;502578this thing you describe it...it cannot exist between D&Ders...it...cannot...

I presume you're being a little facetious there, delver.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;502578this thing you describe it...it cannot exist between D&Ders...it...cannot...

It can, if you do it right.

Quote from: VectorSigma;502580I presume you're being a little facetious there, delver.

LOL He is, of course.

I think it can.

I don't think there's a lot of gamers who chose between 0E and 3E. I think a lot of them chose between a shitty late-2E campaign, run by someone who didn't understand why you're not supposed to use all the optional combat rules at the same time, who learned TSR D&D as the first RPG they ever knew as a 10 year old kid, and made every possible mistake you can.

It seems like every time I talk to someone who really hates TSR D&D, it always comes out they were doing something drastically wrong, rules-wise, or they were using all the options that are specifically labelled "Caution: Will Slow Down Your Game - Don't Do It, You Fool!" - and then complaining 2e was complicated and slow.

I suppose there have to be some people out there who transitioned from a well - run 0E game to well-run 3E game, and decided they just loved the 3E style. I haven't met a ton of them.

Quote from: Benoist;502296What I think could work is first, a simple, loose core game that you can play like B/X D&D, create characters in 5-10 minutes tops, that includes the focus on exploration and adventure, advice on building the dungeon and the wilderness, how to come up with your own environments and so on, that you can expand on on your own and provides the tools to do so, that is NOT bound to tactical miniatures and grids or any particular play style.

Benoist, I reread your post for the third time. Maybe I just don't get it, but how is your suggestion not "I miss the 80s"?

What you describe sounds fun to me. But I play 0e and despise 3e, but I can't see how what you describe would appeal to people who love 3e or 4e?

Most people who play 3e use minis and grids. All 4e players use them. Lots of 0e players don't. What do you do? If they are optional, then what about your revenue stream?

Also, how could WotC be simultaneous off the supplement treadmill, but create a modular game with new and different modules that support different playstyles? GURPS was the modular supplement game and it was the very definition of treadmill.

Quote from: Rincewind1;502475But they are what, maybe 1% of the whole DnD market?

It's not about them. It's about the 99%.

Occupy Hasbro Street?

Maybe I am wrong, but from my experience, "single edition players" (aka, I only play Xe people) are the majority of D&Ders. And at conventions and game days, the majority are "current edition players".  

Quote from: David R;502502Well, it may not reunite D&Ders but it could remind them that there are elements of commonality between their various playstyles.

What elements are those in your opinion?

Quote from: Kaldric;502598I don't think there's a lot of gamers who chose between 0E and 3E.

I am sorry Kaldric. I use "0e" as my shorthand for anything before 3e. I should have been more clear in my OP. I'll fix that.

Because you are blocking on the base game, SC. The supplements are the specific elements that emulate the different feels people are interested in, which then recreate the game plays people want. One supplement introduces different means to customize characters through feats or destiny paths and specialty tiers. Another adds on to the base game to create the miniature tactical wargame some want. Another introduces campaign arcs, themes, storytelling structures and adventure paths. Another describes open worlds in motion and sandbox play. And so on.

The base game is just that: the basic game. The common point that embodies the hub of the game for everyone, is used to play an open minimalist game and introduce newbies to the game. Ideally, instead of a PH MM DMG trilogy at launch, you have the base game, the core, followed very closely by two or three supplements that act as such add ons to the game and satisfy different audiences if taken separately, combined or ignored completely. Then you just add gradually to this corpus of supplemental material, much like you add sets and pieces to your LEGO collection.

I have a better chance of scoring a three-way with Karen Gillian and Kylie Minogue than D&D5 has of uniting the D&D community.

No, it can't reunite the various fan bases into one big group holding hands and swaying to kumbayah.  But I doubt that's what WotC is aiming for.  

More likely, they're aiming at unifying the market, rather than the fan bases.  That is, they want the AD&D fans and the 3e fans and the 4e fans all buying WotC D&D products, even if they're buying *different* WotC D&D products.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;502619No, it can't reunite the various fan bases into one big group holding hands and swaying to kumbayah.  But I doubt that's what WotC is aiming for.  

More likely, they're aiming at unifying the market, rather than the fan bases.  That is, they want the AD&D fans and the 3e fans and the 4e fans all buying WotC D&D products, even if they're buying *different* WotC D&D products.

Yep. There it is. The more I think about it, the more I know that is the only way to get the job done.

Quote from: Spinachcat;502442The idea of reuniting D&Ders who are devoted to their beloved edition seems bizarre and ludicrous to me. The mindset behind gameplay for 0e, 3e and 4e make them completely different games.

To me, it's like saying you are going to make a new RPG that convinces fans of Savage Worlds and BRP to drop their game and now play yours. At best, you make a new fantasy RPG that is really fun, but if the SW and BRP players are already having lots of fun with their game of choice, why would they buy your new game except as a curiosity?

In my mind, the best 5e can do is create something that appeals to teens and new gamers. The "D&D crowd" is so fractured (or diverse) that the best you can sell them is dice and miniatures.

Am I wrong? If so, how could 5e reunite the clans?


EDIT: When I say "0e", I just mean any edition before 3e. Sorry for the confusion.

I haven't been EXCITED since AD&D2e...and I doubt ANYTHING gets me to drop Savage Worlds...but I'll keep an open mind. I did with the last two editions.

The objective of uniting the fanbase is as others have said absurd.

On the other hand I do believe it is possible to undo the harm done by 4e.  

First off, return to the d20/ogl liscence.  Seriously, the cat is out of the bag and all they can do by trying to put it back in is limit their potential customer base.  From now on they have to compete in the market like everyone else.  If they fail it is because their game is sub par.  The name Dungeons & Dragons still has some pull but nothing like it had ten years ago.

Second, make a good tight core that's got some life in it.  I don't think the math is so bad in 4e but it needs tightened up substantially and it needs to feel like D&D.  Don't ask me how you do that, I'm not on Hasbro's pay roll but D&D has its own unique feel.  My guess is putting back the cosmology and going back to the hit dice system is the way to go.  Just give out a hit dice for level zero rather than hit points equal to Con to widen that sweet spot.  I'd also move back to more realistic, historically grounded artwork.

Third, use real measurements.  It's not so hard to divide feet by five to get spaces.  Real measurements are better for narrative games and work just fine for tactical ones.  Don't drop the minatures guys or the narrative guys support them both in the core.  TSR did it from OD&D to AD&D and it's not exactly rocket science.

Fourth, speaking of the core, it should do as much and more than AD&D 1e not less.

Even then I think the best WotC can hope for is to draw in the largest pool of fans possible in the new camp, they're making a new camp and that divides things once more but they need to broaden their appeal not narrow it. D&D was successful in the first place because it hit a broad user base.

Personall, I already signed up for the play test. I hate 4e like I hate going to the dentist for a problem, but I want to believe in this. All they have to do is make sure the power and the rule mean something clear in character and not give any kind of magic to the fighter and rogue, and I'm happy. This shit isn't hard.

Quote from: Spinachcat;502458What could they possibly do to please the fans of 0e, 3e and 4e?

Beginner's Dungeons and Dragons - A beginners boxed set with stripped down rules for play up to, say, 5th-10th level, perhaps with the higher levels in a separate booklet in the box.  Include a sample adventure and lots of GM advice about how to run games, create adventures, and so on.  Market this version to beginners.

Dungeons and Dragons (Core) - Similar to D&D 3.5e without tactical combat, map board-oriented rules, feats, and complex monster ability interactions so that it doesn't require rule mastery to play well (comparable to 1e AD&D in complexity but with more unified mechanics, including skills).  Sell as a single rulebook comparable to the Rules Cyclopedia with Monster Manual add-ons (starting with a basic Monster Manual and each including Advanced rules--see below--split out into a sidebar so they can be ignored).  Market this version to existing role-players and people ready to move on from the beginner's set.

Advanced Dungeons and Dragons - Adds feats, tactical combat requiring a map board, and other complexities that appeal to those who like "rule mastery" somewhere in the 3.5e/4e complexity range.  Provide optional rules to balance encounters the D&D 4e way.  Sell as a Players Handbook and Dungeon Master's Guide (it will share Monster Manuals with the Core game) and then churn out splatbooks for classes and so on.  Market this version to the rules-mastery people for whom the idea of "Advanced" rules will appeal.

Dungeons and Dragons Lite - A stripped down D&D similar in complexity of the MicroLite74 games with advice on rulings rather than rules play, available as a small digest-sized book that can easily be carried around.  Give some guidelines for stripping down or adapting monsters from the more complex versions into this version or include that in the monster books, too.  Market this to the OSR, indie, and rules-light people.

Have all of these versions ready to go for simultaneous release to emphasize the unity of the line.  The biggest thing that seems to need conversion between versions of D&D when people adapt adventures is monsters and treasures so either multi-stat monsters or provide a path for conversion between complexity levels.

What else would they publish once that's complete?

Expand any of these at an appropriate complexity level into other genres via the Gamma World, Star Frontiers, Boot Hill, Gangbusters, and so on settings.  Publish a setting a year, including fan favorites such as Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, and Dark Sun.  Put out a Monster book that deals with helping GMs create their own unique monsters (something like Monster Workshop) and how to adapt them to the different complexity levels.   Perhaps hold a contest for inclusion of fan-created monsters in future Monster Manuals.  Produce a compatible psionics-oriented version of the core rules similar to the 3.5e Expanded Psionics Handbook.  

Anything in 4e that relies solely on game logic rather than game world logic (e.g., per-encounter abilities, MMORPG-like character combat roles, etc.) should be dumped, reworked to have some game world logic, or made optional in the Advanced game (if the 4e players are really attached to it).  At the other end, avoid race-as-class and make race and class distinct character options, but make racial classes an option, perhaps in an Unearthed Arcana-type book.

Bring back the original OGL.  Make the original D&D and AD&D material available via PDF and perhaps print-on-demand, including 5e conversion material so that you could, for example, play Keep on the Borderlands with 5e.

Quote from: Spinachcat;502601What elements are those in your opinion?

You'll need someone familiar with the nuances of the various editions and the culture to articulate those. Me, I'd probably start a flame war. I do know that 4E overnight left many of us out in the cold. Mind you, I'm not a 4E hater or anything like that but even within my own (admittedly) small circle of gamer friends, it was those who got it and those who didn't. With the latter it was as though a different game was being played and we're talking about a group of gamers right up to 3E and maybe 3.5 had a whole lot to talk about when it came to D&D. I'm hoping 5E enables us to have those conversations again.

Regards,
David R