Quote from: Black Vulmea;753797:rotfl:

Can't decide which is funnier, Stuart's original observation or the Pundit not getting it.

Quote from: Gunslinger;753450Isn't 5E just an OSR product with better support?   If it succeeds, I believe the OSR will have it's first legitimate blockbuster.

By the very traditionalist definition, 5e, even the Basic version, certainly will not be an "OSR" product.

However, it is seriously informed by Old School, and that's a huge victory.

Quote from: P&P;753366* Thanks to the RPGPundit for inventing the idea of a free .pdf rulebook, by the way.  Well done that man!

Quote from: P&P;753800And you deserve full credit for that.  Full credit.  In fact, why not start an onanistic thread about it?

Thread victory to P&P.

Quote from: gonster;753265I see the OSR returning back to its hobbyist roots.

For the most part, the OSR has never left its hobbyist roots. Sure there are some people trying to make money from selling OSR rules and adventures, but for the most part even those people are doing it as a sideline, not as a way to pay their mortgage and other bills. A lot of OSR material is available for free in PDF or for sale at low prices.  Those producing free or low cost material are unlikely to stop just because WOTC publishes 5e Basic for free.

The OSR is all about playing TSR versions of D&D (or clones/modifications thereof). Some GMs/players may decide to play 5e instead, but a lot of us will keep on playing what we have been playing and keep on producing stuff for those games. Those in the OSR for the money only (and there are relatively few of those as there isn't a lot of money in producing OSR materials) may move on if they see more money else, of course.

I will probably not be moving to 5e. It's different enough that I'd have to spend a lot of time redoing parts of my homebrew worlds. That's more trouble than its worth since they work fine with OD&D, AD&D1e, B/X, BECMI/RC, and early 2e (and clones/variants thereof) -- and I already own (and know) those rules and they still work fine. 5e would have to better than what I already have (by my standards of better) by a good amount before I'd move to it. From what I've seen of the playtest and hype on the WOTC site, it will be a nice game, but not "better enough" than what I already have to bother converting to it.

The OSR is going to respond with much pulling of hair, gnashing of teeth, and burning of monks; so no change really.

Quote from: estar;753464That will depend on the adventures more than the rules. If they don't make it easy for third party to support it then the adventures and organized play will set the "tone" of 5e.

If they do make it easy for third party support then it will be a big tent with a variety of styles to choose from.

I see where you're coming from.  The OGL allowed for independent publishers and adventure writers to set their own tone that allowed for unique takes with an instant familiarity.  As a brand, it will be interesting to see how that that works.  Do you dilute the tone of the brand by allowing everyone to support it and allow the consumer to choose or strengthen the tone to a core demographic?  A difficult balancing act to be sure.  

For me, I'd probably choose the latter.  I really love what the "OSR" has done and prefer some of their takes on the game.  On the other hand, it's nice to know what to expect and fine tune it to my preferences given the tools at hand.

Quote from: dragoner;753869The OSR is going to respond with much pulling of hair, gnashing of teeth, and burning of monks; so no change really.

What did the Monks ever do to you?:eek:

Quote from: Marleycat;753874What did the Monks ever do to you?:eek:

It's all that monk-eying around, it makes me triggery.

Quote from: RPGPundit;753837By the very traditionalist definition, 5e, even the Basic version, certainly will not be an "OSR" product.

However, it is seriously informed by Old School, and that's a huge victory.

Yet, it will be a derivative of D&D that I am hoping will be instantly familiar, it is offering me a free pdf to preview the game, and I would think, it will have a fair amount of community support.  So what will make it distinct from the existing OSR community outside of its immense brand recognition and publishing quality which has narrowed significantly?  Even now I wonder how much different 5E will be from something like BFRPG, ACKS, LotFP, OSRIC, DCC, S&W, LL, or even previous iterations of D&D.  

Will 5th edition be more than another take on D&D?

FYI Raggi just asked on Google+ whether he should make a 5e version of Death Frost or Love Doom.

Quote from: RPGPundit;753837By the very traditionalist definition, 5e, even the Basic version, certainly will not be an "OSR" product.

However, it is seriously informed by Old School, and that's a huge victory.

Well, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, so they say.  I won't embed them here (because it will take up way too much screen real estate), but look at the following at just a quick glance, and see if it reminds you of an OSR game

example 1
example 2
example 3
Example 4

Because all of those?  Designed with no requirement of minis, battlemaps, or grids.  Designed for, and written with, the 5e ruleset.  So you all can be the judge if 5e replicates the OSR, or at least has influences from it.

Quote from: Gunslinger;753881Will 5th edition be more than another take on D&D?

That's my question too. I haven't heard a single thing about it that makes me say, "Hey, that's brilliant, I have to play this game." I've watched a few of the live playtests on youtube, and it seemed to me like they were playing more-or-less the same ol' D&D.* Which is great. The same ol' D&D is what I love to play, but I don't see anything that makes me think that this is the edition of it that I should be playing.

*Though it did seem a little overpowered on the players' side.

Quote from: jeff37923;753702There has been no indication that 5E will be OGL, but plenty that it will be backwards compatable with an earlier version of D&D (and thus retroclones).

Has there been any indicator that Next will be backwards compatible? The last playtest was not. The classes, exp progression, and monsters are all different. And WOTC has not mentioned backwards compatibility since early in the playtest?

Sure you can play a 5e module with AD&D. But you have to sit down and convert it. Same goes the other way around.

Quote from: Omega;753903Has there been any indicator that Next will be backwards compatible? The last playtest was not. The classes, exp progression, and monsters are all different. And WOTC has not mentioned backwards compatibility since early in the playtest?

Sure you can play a 5e module with AD&D. But you have to sit down and convert it. Same goes the other way around.

Really???  Well, that IS curious.

Coupled with the 'OGL might only be for fans' possibility, 5e might just maybe be an attempt to put the OGL genie back in the bottle.

If they don't license their new, possibly-incompatible content to publishers, AND aggressively "protect their IP", that would make for a decidedly different landscape.

It seems suicidal to me, but then again so would be enabling another Paizo to outsell you at your own product.

Exciting times!  

Quote from: P&P;753800And you deserve full credit for that.  Full credit.  In fact, why not start an onanistic thread about it?

Its my duty, so that all the ultra-jealous pundit-haters pissing themselves in impotent rage at my ongoing success can snark about me.

Every hater's remark, be it outraged, angry, defiant, or of course sarcastic, they're all just delicious treats for me.  And these last few days? Its been Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Mardi Gras all in one.

RPGPundit