Mike Mearls will likely have serious input.  Why not?  5E made money, and has put a positive spin on D&D for 6 years now.  It will be all hands on deck, for "The Best D&D Ever" all over again.

They have plenty of time, plenty of money, and will definitely want to cash in on the whole "50 Years of D&D" thing.  WOTC and Hasbro will definitely do it.

Quote from: Razor 007;1132433Mike Mearls will likely have serious input.  Why not?  5E made money, and has put a positive spin on D&D for 6 years now.  It will be all hands on deck, for "The Best D&D Ever" all over again.

They have plenty of time, plenty of money, and will definitely want to cash in on the whole "50 Years of D&D" thing.  WOTC and Hasbro will definitely do it.

I don't doubt that. I admit to some curiosity about 'what will it look like?' I expect a mix of further Seattle progressivism and an attempt to try and recapture the 'edgy' and 'daring' nature of the days of the Satanic Panic, with minimal mechanical changes, but that could be just my fears/morbid wishes. WotC has made it quite clear that they don't think I belong in the New Order, so I'll be looking elsewhere.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1132434I don't doubt that. I admit to some curiosity about 'what will it look like?' I expect a mix of further Seattle progressivism and an attempt to try and recapture the 'edgy' and 'daring' nature of the days of the Satanic Panic, with minimal mechanical changes, but that could be just my fears/morbid wishes. WotC has made it quite clear that they don't think I belong in the New Order, so I'll be looking elsewhere.

I've reached the point where I very rarely buy anything at launch.  So a year or two after 6E comes out, if they haven't gone further progressive nuts, and the game has been getting good feedback, I might take a gander.  I doubt it, but I might.  More likely, when my 5E campaigns wind down, I'll probably run something else.  My own system is starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel in the rough play test phase, such that I could be ready soon to run a real campaign in it.  That will keep me fairly busy.  I've also got an itch to run DCC and ACKS.  Either way, 6E could be old hat by the time I get around to prioritizing a WotC game again.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1132434I don't doubt that. I admit to some curiosity about 'what will it look like?' I expect a mix of further Seattle progressivism and an attempt to try and recapture the 'edgy' and 'daring' nature of the days of the Satanic Panic, with minimal mechanical changes, but that could be just my fears/morbid wishes. WotC has made it quite clear that they don't think I belong in the New Order, so I'll be looking elsewhere.

Hey; I'm an old white balding greybearded heterosexual fellow, who has a positive impression of the creative works of Gygax and Arneson.  I am likely outside of their target demographic, myself.  But, I'm sure they'd still gladly take my hard earned money.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1132435I've reached the point where I very rarely buy anything at launch.  So a year or two after 6E comes out, if they haven't gone further progressive nuts, and the game has been getting good feedback, I might take a gander.  I doubt it, but I might.  More likely, when my 5E campaigns wind down, I'll probably run something else.  My own system is starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel in the rough play test phase, such that I could be ready soon to run a real campaign in it.  That will keep me fairly busy.  I've also got an itch to run DCC and ACKS.  Either way, 6E could be old hat by the time I get around to prioritizing a WotC game again.

I'm kitbashing 1e (OSRIC specifically, because 1e is OOP again) and ACKS. There's a lot I like in 5e-as-a-toolkit, but I like other toolkits better.

If it's good I'm enough of a sucker that I'll buy it.  If not I still have 2e, 5e, and Pathfinder 1e for all my D&D like needs.  That's on top of D&D 4e and all other non-D&D games.  Good old vote with the wallet.

IDK, I keep seeing this prediction in threads about D&D editions, but what would 6e even be about? 3e happened IMO, cuz 2e had already ran its course, had a ton of rules supplements with options and enough players had gotten used to choices baseline D&D didn't have. So they made having a ton of options standard, and streamlined the system's core mechanics, which work great at the time.

With 4e I guess WotC got greedy, but while the system failed it had distinct features that tried to make all classes similar with "Powers" and stuff, and they further streamlined some of the core mechanics by giving characters a fixed modifier to rolls based on their level and a flat extra modifier if they were actually "skilled".

5e obviously happened cuz 4e failed spectacularly, so they desperately needed a new edition that fixed what 4e did. And 5e has been wildly successful, with even more streamlined core mechanics. Now everything is essentially a skill (or "Proficiency")--as all RPGs should be IMHO--no more separate Combat Modifier, and Saving Throws, and Skill ranks treated under completely different metrics. Instead ALL rolls are handled through a relevant Ability Score modifier, plus Proficiency modifier, and combat skills and saving throws are just proficiencies. Though, all characters get exactly the same "Proficiency" bonus based on their level, and you're either proficient or you're not.

Where else can they go from here? Get rid of character classes and go full skill-based? Bring back variable skill levels? What?

Quote from: Razor 007;1132433Mike Mearls will likely have serious input.  Why not?  5E made money, and has put a positive spin on D&D for 6 years now.  It will be all hands on deck, for "The Best D&D Ever" all over again.

They have plenty of time, plenty of money, and will definitely want to cash in on the whole "50 Years of D&D" thing.  WOTC and Hasbro will definitely do it.

Not going to happen my man. Dream on.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1132468Where else can they go from here? Get rid of character classes and go full skill-based? Bring back variable skill levels? What?

One of three choices:

A. Radical changes, similar to those you suggested.

B. The "5.5" route, where they tinker with peripheral stuff, don't change any of the underlying system, but it becomes death of a thousand minor changes.

C. The "1E to 2E" plan--system all stays largely the same, but with more options and maybe some better organization, cleanup of wording, etc.

If they've completely lost their minds, it will be A.  If they let bad business leadership and greed get in the way of their common sense, it will be B.  If they've got half a clue, it will be C.  There are definitely some additions that weren't in the PHB, MM, and DMG that could be well-placed in a revised 5E, with the mere benefit of hindsight. All they need is some leadership to block any central rules changes and limit sharply the peripheral changes.

Of course, there are better things that could theoretically be done than any of those, but I think that's about the limit that WotC has demonstrated thus far they are capable of managing.

Quote from: RandyB;1132438I'm kitbashing 1e (OSRIC specifically, because 1e is OOP again) and ACKS. There's a lot I like in 5e-as-a-toolkit, but I like other toolkits better.

https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?filters=0_0_0_0_0_45346_45546_0

POD is still available, so I guess 1st is technically in print.

Anyway, I get the whole edition treadmill, i.e., way to make money, but Monopoly has been sold pretty much unchanged since 1935, and is one of the most successful games of all time. Why can't Hasbro just keep every edition in print and say "we have multiple versions for every style of play, pick one" and leave it at that?

D&D boxed set
Holmes
B/X
BECMI
RC
AD&D
AD&D 2nd
3rd
3.5
4th
5th

So you keep ALL of those in print, that covers 99% of the entire RPG market. License videogames, movies, and bedsheets if you want more money. It worked in the 80s for TSR, why can't it work now?

Quote from: Brad;1132490https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?filters=0_0_0_0_0_45346_45546_0

POD is still available, so I guess 1st is technically in print.

Anyway, I get the whole edition treadmill, i.e., way to make money, but Monopoly has been sold pretty much unchanged since 1935, and is one of the most successful games of all time. Why can't Hasbro just keep every edition in print and say "we have multiple versions for every style of play, pick one" and leave it at that?

D&D boxed set
Holmes
B/X
BECMI
RC
AD&D
AD&D 2nd
3rd
3.5
4th
5th

So you keep ALL of those in print, that covers 99% of the entire RPG market. License videogames, movies, and bedsheets if you want more money. It worked in the 80s for TSR, why can't it work now?

No POD option for the 1e DMG that I see. But I couldn't find the PDF before, so thanks for the assist!

Edit: the POD for the DMG has been pulled  for quality control updates. I'll keep an eye out for the return of POD.

Definitely major thanks!

I'm interested in learning new RPGs like I am interested in picking up STD, so count my interest in any D&D 6e in the negative values.

With my old TSR stuff, and 5e Basic .pdf as the compromise edition, I have little reason to feign interest in more WotC publishing treadmill. A 6e product and its hype would fall on my deaf ears. They would be better served trying to sell me a retro D&D woodburning kit. Better yet, a festive collector label version of Mt. Dew & Cheetos celebrating D&D 50 year anniversary! :cool: Then it can be placed in my gamebooks burial pyramid for when I need snacks in the afterlife.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1132489One of three choices:

A. Radical changes, similar to those you suggested.

B. The "5.5" route, where they tinker with peripheral stuff, don't change any of the underlying system, but it becomes death of a thousand minor changes.

C. The "1E to 2E" plan--system all stays largely the same, but with more options and maybe some better organization, cleanup of wording, etc.

If they've completely lost their minds, it will be A.  If they let bad business leadership and greed get in the way of their common sense, it will be B.  If they've got half a clue, it will be C.  There are definitely some additions that weren't in the PHB, MM, and DMG that could be well-placed in a revised 5E, with the mere benefit of hindsight. All they need is some leadership to block any central rules changes and limit sharply the peripheral changes.

Of course, there are better things that could theoretically be done than any of those, but I think that's about the limit that WotC has demonstrated thus far they are capable of managing.

Option A would probably be preference, TBH--at least for the specific examples I gave. Though, I understand that would be catastrophic from a business POV, and it wouldn't even be D&D at that point. Plus plenty of systems already do that.

I agree that option C would be the best choice for the game from a business and player base POV. Keep the system as it is and simply refine what's already there, clean things up and add more options. The last three editions have been radical departures from what came before (especially 4e) that have rendered ALL prior supplements unusable, and I suspect people are sick of that at this point.

That may have worked with 3e cuz it was arguably an improvement (at least in terms of core mechanics and basic options, but classes became a cumbersome bloat from that point on). But every edition essentially becoming a new game sharing only ability score names, class-based progression (with completely different class abilities) and a d20+Mod mechanic (with different ways to determine how that Mod gets calculated) is absurd.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1132549That may have worked with 3e cuz it was arguably an improvement (at least in terms of core mechanics and basic options, but classes became a cumbersome bloat from that point on). But every edition essentially becoming a new game sharing only ability score names, class-based progression (with completely different class abilities) and a d20+Mod mechanic (with different ways to determine how that Mod gets calculated) is absurd.

Yeah.  They essentially got a free pass on the radical changes in 3E because it had been so long since a new edition, TSR going under, worry that D&D was "dead" however misplaced, etc.  As long as 3E was a reasonably playable game (and it was out of the gate, especially at low levels), then they could get away with a lot.  That bridge has long been crossed for WotC.  

Now if they ever gave up on it--either selling it (unlikely) or totally framing out the game design part to a third-party while keeping all the brand stuff (possible), especially if it had been dormant for a few years first--then I can see that new custodian of the game getting similar leeway to monkey with it.  And honestly, I think someone like Kobold Press would do a better job with it than they would.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1132553Yeah.  They essentially got a free pass on the radical changes in 3E because it had been so long since a new edition, TSR going under, worry that D&D was "dead" however misplaced, etc.  As long as 3E was a reasonably playable game (and it was out of the gate, especially at low levels), then they could get away with a lot.  That bridge has long been crossed for WotC.  

   Yep. While I appreciate a lot of what 4E did, there's no denying that they gravely misread the market--there's a statement somewhere where they said 'if we'd known how positively people would respond to 3E's changes, we'd have gone even farther' without recognizing how things had changed. They further hurt themselves by a) not even offering the figleaf of a conversion document and b) having done 3.5 only 5 years earlier.