SPECIAL NOTICE
Malicious code was found on the site, which has been removed, but would have been able to access files and the database, revealing email addresses, posts, and encoded passwords (which would need to be decoded). However, there is no direct evidence that any such activity occurred. REGARDLESS, BE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS. And as is good practice, remember to never use the same password on more than one site. While performing housekeeping, we also decided to upgrade the forums.
This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

It seems like we're really getting 5.5e in 2024

Started by Eric Diaz, September 26, 2021, 09:53:18 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Steven Mitchell

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on October 01, 2021, 10:58:21 AM
  They claim Spellbound is almost ready to see the light of day. Maybe that will allow it to fill the niche of 'what 3.X wanted to be,' as opposed to 'what 3.X became,' which PF has sewn up. Of course, I'm also the eccentric who thinks that Savage Worlds is the closest thing to what 2nd Edition wanted to be, so take my assessments of the hobby with a cubic foot of salt. :)

I think I get where you are coming from with that.  What 5E wanted to be versus what is was out of the gate versus what it is becoming is pretty much the root of my arguments. 

Armchair Gamer

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 01, 2021, 01:40:45 PM
I think I get where you are coming from with that.  What 5E wanted to be versus what is was out of the gate versus what it is becoming is pretty much the root of my arguments.

   Though I've more or less ignored the game's unfolding, the 5E we got was a different beast in many ways from the 5E we were promised initially.

oggsmash

  I only ever read through Fantasy Craft, and it looked like a higher fantasy adaption of the Mongoose Conan version of D20, which I liked a lot.   I think the massive damage with a scaled threshold is something that keeps high level players in check to a degree and prevents having to have every enemy either titanic in ability to do damage or laden with insta death magic.  I remember there were other things I liked a good bit (I want to say defense was calculated the same, on a parry and a dodge, but I do not remember and could be conflating with Conan now), and armor as damage reduction.   I think i might pick up a copy for the library.

Ghostmaker

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on October 01, 2021, 01:48:15 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 01, 2021, 01:40:45 PM
I think I get where you are coming from with that.  What 5E wanted to be versus what is was out of the gate versus what it is becoming is pretty much the root of my arguments.

   Though I've more or less ignored the game's unfolding, the 5E we got was a different beast in many ways from the 5E we were promised initially.
Didn't this happen with 4E/NEXT as well? We got promised a whole bunch of options and then it turned into a wet fart?

Steven Mitchell

Quote from: Ghostmaker on October 01, 2021, 02:08:11 PM
Didn't this happen with 4E/NEXT as well? We got promised a whole bunch of options and then it turned into a wet fart?

Everything that WotC does is launched with more promises than they can deliver.  It's practically a corporate tic at this point, and a dead give away they have people writing promises that don't know or care how the game actually works.  You get that type in all kinds of businesses.  It's a different corporate dysfunction compared to, say, Lorraine Williams at TSR but in the ballpark. 

There's another level to it, though.  They aren't very good at clearly communicating the big strategy within their team.  Not sure if that's not having the strategy thought out, not reinforcing it while doing design, development, marketing and testing, not hiring people that believe in it, playing office politics, of something else causing the trouble.  They had some handle on it at the start of 3E, for whatever reason.  Of course, some of that was that they were making it up as they went, which is not necessarily a bad thing if the decision makers know that and are talking to each other. 

Part of WotC's issue now is they seem to be attracting more and more people that believe their own bullshit.  Always a bad sign.

Eric Diaz

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on October 01, 2021, 01:11:07 PM
Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 01, 2021, 01:04:03 PM
I do not enjoy Savage Worlds. I tried, but all PCs felt a bit samey to me and d6 to d12 didn't feel like enough granularity to me. A matter of taste, I guess.

The difference from d4->d12 is ~50%. Thats not accounting for things like frenzy, free-rerolls, static bonuses, aiming, ignoring penalties, circumstantial bonuses, equipment stuff. ETC.

D&D 5e has a variance of ~50% - Over 20 LEVELS.

That's... not exactly what I'm saying. I got accustomed to abilities in the 8-20 range (or 8-16 when playing GURPS). Even if you only consider the modifier (-1 to +5), you can see a distinction between the Str 8 wizard, the Str 10 thief, the Str 12 cleric, the Str 14 paladin, etc., all the way to the strength 20 (up to 24 in 5e) barbarian.

Now, it doesn't actually work in D&D because if you roll a Strength contest between, say 8 and 16, the stronger guy will only win about 70% of the time (or something), while I'd expect something like 90% or more.

And I think the difference between the d4 and d12 (even with the additional d6 for everyone) is probably more pronounced than +1 in D&D, I think. It's just the D&D feels more granular than that, to me. Again, a matter of taste.
Chaos Factory Books  - Dark fantasy RPGs and more!

Methods & Madness - my  D&D 5e / Old School / Game design blog.

Jaeger

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on September 30, 2021, 08:30:19 PM
  Bear in mind that Pathfinder had benefits that no one else had before or since either: The ability to clone 3.5E without legal concerns, the established track record, the high production values from day one,...

... and I think WotC is taking numerous steps to make sure it never happens again, such as doubling down on brand identity and making sure no one can pick up where they leave off with the game.

Yes, PF had circumstances in its favor. And there is a high bar to 'compete' with D&D.

But a high bar is not an impossible task.

My point is that WotC is fully capable of screwing the pooch. They proved that they can do so.

"Official D&D" can fail.

If they did it once, then they can do it again. They can take all the steps to "prevent it" that they want. As we have seen in recent history, no IP is immune from a royal fucking up. Yes, the circumstances will be different, and it may take longer for a second player to gain traction. But even D&D is not immune to failure.


Quote from: tenbones on October 01, 2021, 10:31:58 AM
As an odd obscure footnote to history, concerning the transition period from 3.x to 4e...
...
The kick in the nuts is when Mike told me and others that he'd gotten the offer to join the 4e team... Our conspiracy theory was that they got wind our little Open Source project and killed it by offering Mearls the Golden Handcuffs. In hindsight I'm less certain of this. We had a crew of *killers* that were down with this project - so it might still be true. ...

Before the launch of 3e WotC went around and bought out a few small press games like the: Cutthroat: The Shadow Wars RPG because they used a universal d20 roll-high mechanic. A revised edition was released in 1999, and then promptly went completely "out of print" in 2000...

I don't think WotC needs to do this kind of low-down behavior anymore with the explosion of the 5e juggernaut. But with such a quick edition turn to 4e, I can easily see them trying to hedge their bets. I have no problem believing it.
"The envious are not satisfied with equality; they secretly yearn for superiority and revenge."

The select quote function is your friend: Right-Click and Highlight the text you want to quote. The - Quote Selected Text - button appears. You're welcome.

Eric Diaz

Regarding the actual topic...

I don't know why, but I have a feeling that D&D (gaming) books already had their best moment. I expect new books to be successful - maybe even more so than old ones - but there will not be much more growth. Instead, they'll sell a lot more toys, movies, books, etc.

I cannot articulate why, but I'm feeling this for a while. 5e is past its prime and I don't think 5.5e will fix that.

I do not think, however, that a new competitor will emerge. Non-D&D RPGs will remain a niche and that's okay, I guess.

Just a hunch at this point. Might be completely wrong.
Chaos Factory Books  - Dark fantasy RPGs and more!

Methods & Madness - my  D&D 5e / Old School / Game design blog.

Shrieking Banshee

Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 01, 2021, 04:51:13 PMThat's... not exactly what I'm saying. I got accustomed to abilities in the 8-20 range (or 8-16 when playing GURPS). Even if you only consider the modifier (-1 to +5), you can see a distinction between the Str 8 wizard, the Str 10 thief, the Str 12 cleric, the Str 14 paladin, etc., all the way to the strength 20 (up to 24 in 5e) barbarian.
Well GURPS rolls on a sharp curve meaning smaller numbers are more significant. A +1 difference there is more significant then a +1 difference in D&D.
QuoteNow, it doesn't actually work in D&D because if you roll a Strength contest between, say 8 and 16, the stronger guy will only win about 70% of the time (or something), while I'd expect something like 90% or more.

The actual difference between the two is actually a total of +4. Which is 20%. The strong guy will triumph SIGNIFICANTLY less 70%.

QuoteIt's just the D&D feels more granular than that, to me. Again, a matter of taste.
Alright, I guess I get what you mean.

Jaeger

Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 01, 2021, 04:54:52 PM
...
I don't know why, but I have a feeling that D&D (gaming) books already had their best moment. I expect new books to be successful - maybe even more so than old ones - but there will not be much more growth. Instead, they'll sell a lot more toys, movies, books, etc.
...

Personally I think that a lot of WotC and Hasbros plans for D&D as a brand are waiting to see how the upcoming movie and tv series hit.

If the movie and tv series are Hits: Expect to see D&D fucking everywhere.

If the Movie and Tv series Flop Hard...  That can have a Big effect on the growth of the hobby with the casuals and normies.
"The envious are not satisfied with equality; they secretly yearn for superiority and revenge."

The select quote function is your friend: Right-Click and Highlight the text you want to quote. The - Quote Selected Text - button appears. You're welcome.

Omega

Quote from: DM_Curt on September 27, 2021, 08:16:47 PM
I skipped 3e, 3.5 and 4e.  By that pattern, I can skip 5.5e, 6e and 7e, right?  :P

At the rate WOTC is going there may not be a 6 or 7 before they finally get buried by their own incompetence and get what they deserve. Cancelled.

I like 5e, warts and all. Its easy enough to fix or totally jettison the things that do not work, like unbreakable long rests, and get a fairly good D&D game. But it was inevitable that WOTC would eventually fuck things up some how some way. WOTC is too infatuated with the damn "five year plan" that Im surprised they didnt roll out a new edition already. That they intend to have this whatever it is, out in 3 years is though interesting. It gives them alot of leeway to fuck things up even better.

horsesoldier

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on October 01, 2021, 01:48:15 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 01, 2021, 01:40:45 PM
I think I get where you are coming from with that.  What 5E wanted to be versus what is was out of the gate versus what it is becoming is pretty much the root of my arguments.

   Though I've more or less ignored the game's unfolding, the 5E we got was a different beast in many ways from the 5E we were promised initially.

Very different. We were promised a modular game. That was kicked to the curb immediately. Too much design work. When I saw that wasn't happening I stopped paying attention.

Pat

Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 01, 2021, 04:51:13 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on October 01, 2021, 01:11:07 PM
Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 01, 2021, 01:04:03 PM
I do not enjoy Savage Worlds. I tried, but all PCs felt a bit samey to me and d6 to d12 didn't feel like enough granularity to me. A matter of taste, I guess.

The difference from d4->d12 is ~50%. Thats not accounting for things like frenzy, free-rerolls, static bonuses, aiming, ignoring penalties, circumstantial bonuses, equipment stuff. ETC.

D&D 5e has a variance of ~50% - Over 20 LEVELS.

That's... not exactly what I'm saying. I got accustomed to abilities in the 8-20 range (or 8-16 when playing GURPS). Even if you only consider the modifier (-1 to +5), you can see a distinction between the Str 8 wizard, the Str 10 thief, the Str 12 cleric, the Str 14 paladin, etc., all the way to the strength 20 (up to 24 in 5e) barbarian.

Now, it doesn't actually work in D&D because if you roll a Strength contest between, say 8 and 16, the stronger guy will only win about 70% of the time (or something), while I'd expect something like 90% or more.
Even with the most granular system in common use in RPGs, the chance S 16 will win in a raw contest of strength should be 100%, barring cheating. But that's a problem with D&D throughout all the various editions, and RPGs in general: They're generally not good at reflecting different success gradients. Most games base everything on bell curves, where everyone has a chance. But that doesn't really apply with things like arm wrestling and nuclear physics.

Eric Diaz

Quote from: Pat on October 05, 2021, 03:58:34 PM
Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 01, 2021, 04:51:13 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on October 01, 2021, 01:11:07 PM
Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 01, 2021, 01:04:03 PM
I do not enjoy Savage Worlds. I tried, but all PCs felt a bit samey to me and d6 to d12 didn't feel like enough granularity to me. A matter of taste, I guess.

The difference from d4->d12 is ~50%. Thats not accounting for things like frenzy, free-rerolls, static bonuses, aiming, ignoring penalties, circumstantial bonuses, equipment stuff. ETC.

D&D 5e has a variance of ~50% - Over 20 LEVELS.

That's... not exactly what I'm saying. I got accustomed to abilities in the 8-20 range (or 8-16 when playing GURPS). Even if you only consider the modifier (-1 to +5), you can see a distinction between the Str 8 wizard, the Str 10 thief, the Str 12 cleric, the Str 14 paladin, etc., all the way to the strength 20 (up to 24 in 5e) barbarian.

Now, it doesn't actually work in D&D because if you roll a Strength contest between, say 8 and 16, the stronger guy will only win about 70% of the time (or something), while I'd expect something like 90% or more.
Even with the most granular system in common use in RPGs, the chance S 16 will win in a raw contest of strength should be 100%, barring cheating. But that's a problem with D&D throughout all the various editions, and RPGs in general: They're generally not good at reflecting different success gradients. Most games base everything on bell curves, where everyone has a chance. But that doesn't really apply with things like arm wrestling and nuclear physics.

Well, yes, but in GURPS at least the Str 16 guy will win 98% of the time instead of 70%. I'll agree in arm-wrestling the real number would be 100%, but most Str contests in RPGs will be "action scenes", where the wizard has at least a very small chance to wrestle the wan out of the minotaur's hand, etc.
Chaos Factory Books  - Dark fantasy RPGs and more!

Methods & Madness - my  D&D 5e / Old School / Game design blog.

Pat

Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 05, 2021, 04:08:32 PM
Quote from: Pat on October 05, 2021, 03:58:34 PM
Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 01, 2021, 04:51:13 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on October 01, 2021, 01:11:07 PM
Quote from: Eric Diaz on October 01, 2021, 01:04:03 PM
I do not enjoy Savage Worlds. I tried, but all PCs felt a bit samey to me and d6 to d12 didn't feel like enough granularity to me. A matter of taste, I guess.

The difference from d4->d12 is ~50%. Thats not accounting for things like frenzy, free-rerolls, static bonuses, aiming, ignoring penalties, circumstantial bonuses, equipment stuff. ETC.

D&D 5e has a variance of ~50% - Over 20 LEVELS.

That's... not exactly what I'm saying. I got accustomed to abilities in the 8-20 range (or 8-16 when playing GURPS). Even if you only consider the modifier (-1 to +5), you can see a distinction between the Str 8 wizard, the Str 10 thief, the Str 12 cleric, the Str 14 paladin, etc., all the way to the strength 20 (up to 24 in 5e) barbarian.

Now, it doesn't actually work in D&D because if you roll a Strength contest between, say 8 and 16, the stronger guy will only win about 70% of the time (or something), while I'd expect something like 90% or more.
Even with the most granular system in common use in RPGs, the chance S 16 will win in a raw contest of strength should be 100%, barring cheating. But that's a problem with D&D throughout all the various editions, and RPGs in general: They're generally not good at reflecting different success gradients. Most games base everything on bell curves, where everyone has a chance. But that doesn't really apply with things like arm wrestling and nuclear physics.

Well, yes, but in GURPS at least the Str 16 guy will win 98% of the time instead of 70%. I'll agree in arm-wrestling the real number would be 100%, but most Str contests in RPGs will be "action scenes", where the wizard has at least a very small chance to wrestle the wan out of the minotaur's hand, etc.
Changing the steepness of the curve can make it apply better in specific cases, but it doesn't address the underlying problem. Though I think the problem is more something to acknowledge and occasionally special case (e.g. have a different mechanic for smashing open doors) than something to be solved, because having different success gradients for everything is infeasible.