Quote from: VisionStorm;1132549But 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.

To be fair to WotC, every one of their editions calculated the mods the same way; (Ability Score - 10) / 2 (round down).

Task resolution has consistently been 1d20+Mod vs. DC. The mod for the roll is almost always Ability Score + some type of proficiency for that specific task. If the DC related to a specific creature it is almost always 10 + Ability Modifier + some type of proficiency.

Ascending AC and Hit Points have been consistently used throughout even if the values have changed slightly. Similarly, while 4E changed who rolled and 5E calls them Dex, Con and Wis saves... the basic structure of Fort, Reflex and Will saves for non-weapon attacks has been consistent across editions.

All have also used a Standard + Swift/Minor/Bonus + Movement action economy with cyclical initiative, six-second rounds and 5 foot squares for grid-based movement.

Honestly, in a general play sense 3e, 4E and 5e have a lot more in common than they do differences. Meaning, that if you're familiar with a 3e Rogue and sat down at a table and were given a 5e Rogue, you might not know how the numbers on the page were determined, and might need to be told that a bonus action is like a 3e swift action, there's nothing inherent to the 5e Rogue that 3e player wouldn't be able to figure out just by familiarizing themselves with their character sheet.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1132489B. 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.

Previews of this are available in Unearthed Arcana.  In particular check out the Variant Class file.  Basically they revamp how a bunch of the core features work for classes.  I found the Martial stuff particularly interesting as fighting-men can basically change their style from day to day.  They use it for rapid testing for upcoming products basically.

They could always cash in with a "super special edition" print run of 5e, similar to the Gygax Memorial Fund editions of 1e. There's definitely a market of nerds buying supar speshul limuted edition (I throw this stone from my glass house with a bookcase full of leather bound Kickstarter-exclusive special editions, as well as my own Gygax 1e copies). It'd require relatively little up-front investment, they could make insane margins on it, and they can slap some pittance to charity on there too and score corporate virtue points. Or do that and also add in a few light changes in there and call it 5.5e as discussed.

Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1132566They could always cash in with a "super special edition" print run of 5e, similar to the Gygax Memorial Fund editions of 1e. There's definitely a market of nerds buying supar speshul limuted edition (I throw this stone from my glass house with a bookcase full of leather bound Kickstarter-exclusive special editions, as well as my own Gygax 1e copies). It'd require relatively little up-front investment, they could make insane margins on it, and they can slap some pittance to charity on there too and score corporate virtue points. Or do that and also add in a few light changes in there and call it 5.5e as discussed.

I think that is much more likely, or an update to 5e, than a 6e at that time.

Quote from: Chris24601;1132560To be fair to WotC, every one of their editions calculated the mods the same way; (Ability Score - 10) / 2 (round down).

Task resolution has consistently been 1d20+Mod vs. DC. The mod for the roll is almost always Ability Score + some type of proficiency for that specific task. If the DC related to a specific creature it is almost always 10 + Ability Modifier + some type of proficiency.

Ascending AC and Hit Points have been consistently used throughout even if the values have changed slightly. Similarly, while 4E changed who rolled and 5E calls them Dex, Con and Wis saves... the basic structure of Fort, Reflex and Will saves for non-weapon attacks has been consistent across editions.

All have also used a Standard + Swift/Minor/Bonus + Movement action economy with cyclical initiative, six-second rounds and 5 foot squares for grid-based movement.

Honestly, in a general play sense 3e, 4E and 5e have a lot more in common than they do differences. Meaning, that if you're familiar with a 3e Rogue and sat down at a table and were given a 5e Rogue, you might not know how the numbers on the page were determined, and might need to be told that a bonus action is like a 3e swift action, there's nothing inherent to the 5e Rogue that 3e player wouldn't be able to figure out just by familiarizing themselves with their character sheet.

The way that ability score modifiers are calculated has remained the same way, but the "some type of proficiency" portion of the equation has changed significantly throughout editions. And for each edition the "proficiency-type" modifier has a completely different "feel".

The way that 3e handled the modifier it felt like a restructuring of the way that older editions handled THAC0 and Saving Throws, while maintaining their essence. Those game stats used modifiers in 3e to reflect the standardized d20+Mod mechanic introduced in the edition, but they still felt like those old stats (except that saves were reduced to the more efficient Fort, Ref & Will), only updated to use the new core mechanics. Characters still had different combat abilities based on their class, which was always a key feature of D&D, and some classes were more resistant against certain types of effects than others.

Then 4e changed all that. Now class became completely irrelevant to your success rate in combat and the only difference in base combat abilities and saving throws between characters of the same level was their relevant ability score and a minor bonus to saves based on class. The only real difference between classes was their powers and their HP, and characters slowly became better at absolutely everything (by the exact same amount) as they gained levels.

Then 5e flipped the switch again (somewhat). Class is still irrelevant to your success rate in combat, but now instead of a minor save bonus you get "Proficiency" in two saving throws instead. And the clear cut and efficient "Fort, Ref & Will" saves were eliminated in favor of the nebulous "every ability score is its own arbitrary save"--which I can agree Strength should make you more resistant against knock-type effects, but the rest is mostly bullshit. Now EVERYTHING is a "Proficiency", which could be good (in fact better than ever before), except that everyone has the exact same bonus for everything and you either have proficiency or you don't. There is no "I'm kinda good at this, but I'm better at that". You're either a pleb or a fucking rockstar, and nobody's really a rockstar unless they have super high ability scores cuz the Proficiency modifiers by themselves SUCK.

And all the flavor of D&D is gone. The only distinction between classes is their bloat of obligatory features per level, which are necessary now to justify a 20 level progression, cuz there are no levels were you steadily get a combat or save bonus, or an extra feat anymore. So you HAVE to get extra class features every single level for levels to mean anything (Yay! More bookkeeping!).

Every time I look at 5e I just wanna get rid of classes and levels and just make the whole thing a straight skill-based game with actual skill progression, and maybe turn classes into something similar to races. Only instead of giving you ability score bonuses your "class" could give you a flat one-time skill bonus to give you an edge, plus maybe a few minor features for flavor. But actual progression would be handled by skills and feat selections, and all former class abilities that aren't just fluff to justify plowing through 20 levels would just be feats. Granted, this would no longer truly be "D&D", but then again neither is 5e, except only in name. 5e is basically a stripped down skill-based system with classes and levels forced on top of it to make it look like D&D.

6e will definitely happen.

I'm seriously doubtful they'll pull any money out of me. But good luck to them.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1132568Every time I look at 5e I just wanna get rid of classes and levels and just make the whole thing a straight skill-based game with actual skill progression, and maybe turn classes into something similar to races. Only instead of giving you ability score bonuses your "class" could give you a flat one-time skill bonus to give you an edge, plus maybe a few minor features for flavor. But actual progression would be handled by skills and feat selections, and all former class abilities that aren't just fluff to justify plowing through 20 levels would just be feats. Granted, this would no longer truly be "D&D", but then again neither is 5e, except only in name. 5e is basically a stripped down skill-based system with classes and levels forced on top of it to make it look like D&D.

Stars Without Number Revised effectively?

But yeah I don't like 5e either. Any issues previous editions had, 5e solved by simply not having the framework for the issue to exist. All issues were solved by amputation. And I find 5e, while more playable then 4e, the least ambitious edition of them all.
It was half-finished and rushed to market, but the stars aligned and it sounded enough like D&D to get people to play it.

But 6e will most certainly come. I hazard it will have even less direction and be even simpler.

Quote from: RandyB;1132493...Edit: the POD for the DMG has been pulled  for quality control updates. I'll keep an eye out for the return of POD...

Yea, pretty pissed about that.
After stupidly giving away all my 1e originals to a friend decades ago when I thought I was done with RPG's (cringe every time I think of it), I saw the MM was finally in POD Premium and then the DMG goes out of print.  How hard is it to have all the 1e core books in Premium POD availability at one time?

As for 6e, I'll try to decide if it worth my time or not when it emerges with hopefully an impartial view.  I would love to see new things to break the mold but likely they would not risk making the huge amount of 5e stuff obsolete overnight.  WOTC and Hasbro did a great job marketing 5e and honestly, I kind of hate the fact they did so well at it.  Feels like they just overwhelmed what used to be much smaller, yet somehow quieter & happy hobby with their hype train and all the baggage that goes along with it.

Maybe the best thing about 6e if the rules suck, it will still inevitably move the hype train along with it and I won't feel like I'm missing out on a good system.

Edit:  Well maybe not a truly 'happy' hobby with all the divisiveness with 4e but at least it was people serious about their systems and more immersed in them.  The blight of the 'casual player' fed on Critical Role vids, expecting the DM's role as circus monkey had not yet emerged.

Quote from: rocksfalleverybodydies;1132576Yea, pretty pissed about that.
After stupidly giving away all my 1e originals to a friend decades ago when I thought I was done with RPG's (cringe every time I think of it), I saw the MM was finally in POD Premium and then the DMG goes out of print.  How hard is it to have all the 1e core books in Premium POD availability at one time?

As for 6e, I'll try to decide if it worth my time or not when it emerges with hopefully an impartial view.  I would love to see new things to break the mold but likely they would not risk making the huge amount of 5e stuff obsolete overnight.  WOTC and Hasbro did a great job marketing 5e and honestly, I kind of hate the fact they did so well at it.  Feels like they just overwhelmed what used to be much smaller, yet somehow quieter & happy hobby with their hype train and all the baggage that goes along with it.

Maybe the best thing about 6e if the rules suck, it will still inevitably move the hype train along with it and I won't feel like I'm missing out on a good system.

Edit:  Well maybe not a truly 'happy' hobby with all the divisiveness with 4e but at least it was people serious about their systems and more immersed in them.  The blight of the 'casual player' fed on Critical Role vids, expecting the DM's role as circus monkey had not yet emerged.

Perhaps whenever you pitch a game, looking for players; just say flat out, "This will not be like Critical Role.  I am running a game; not entertaining an online audience."

Quote from: Razor 007;1132577Perhaps whenever you pitch a game, looking for players; just say flat out, "This will not be like Critical Role.  I am running a game; not entertaining an online audience."

I believe I could run a 1E game without the DMG, as long as the players would roll with me generating target numbers out of thin air.  I would need the PHB and MM, though.

Indeed.  My regular group broke up a while ago and with Covid, I thought I'd try to land a decent game on roll20 or something.  I'll keep trying as I know, while very rare, there are good players out there...somewhere.

Quote from: Razor 007;1132578I believe I could run a 1E game without the DMG, as long as the players would roll with me generating target numbers out of thin air.  I would need the PHB and MM, though.

Totally agree. At the time, the DMG came out 2 years after the MM and one year after the PHB. By the time the DMG finally came out, sure we adopted it, but the fact is, we had already been playing a couple years just fine without it.

Yea with PDF's and things like OSRIC it's definitely feasible.
More for a physical legacy for my kids to read when they grow up and realise why their Dad spent all his time yelling at a book saying "Weapon Speeds do what? Spells and Initiative What Now?  Gygax!"  Heh

Quote from: Razor 007;1132578I believe I could run a 1E game without the DMG, as long as the players would roll with me generating target numbers out of thin air.  I would need the PHB and MM, though.

  On the other hand, try learning the game from a 1E PHB and 2E DMG and MC. It's a wonder we stuck with it long enough to get a 2E PHB.

  Nothing against either 1E or 2E, but of the four combinations of core books to start with, 1E PHB/2E DMG is probably the one that loses the most.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1132583On the other hand, try learning the game from a 1E PHB and 2E DMG and MC. It's a wonder we stuck with it long enough to get a 2E PHB.

  Nothing against either 1E or 2E, but of the four combinations of core books to start with, 1E PHB/2E DMG is probably the one that loses the most.

I don't know from 2e, but I think I can imagine what you were facing. As I said, even the 1e rollout took so long that you had to cobble something together from OD&D, supplements, the AD&D MM, eventually the PHB, and even more eventually the DMG. Never mind learning the game, you basically had to invent it. At that time, D&D  seemed to be more a concept than a system.

Which I don't think was a bad thing, if you don't mind tinkering. Fundamentally, the ttrpg was a revolutionary but basically simple concept after all, and everything erected on top of that is just somebody's tinkering.