What I hope they do for 6e DnD

[gooddragon1]

I hope that they make content balanced around different balance points. So have a number of different balance points and make content for each of them. Maybe it's crazy as an idea. I don't know. Just throwing it out there.

Is it crazy though? Responses will be my sanity check. :)

[Mordaedil]

I also wish they do [the thing]. It would be very nice if they did [the thing]. Maybe then we could play [the thing] and have a good time with [the thing].

I dunno, I think [the thing] is a good idea, what do you think, OP?

[gooddragon1]

I also wish they do [the thing]. It would be very nice if they did [the thing]. Maybe then we could play [the thing] and have a good time with [the thing].

I dunno, I think [the thing] is a good idea, what do you think, OP?

I can't say for sure, but I've heard Varrick make that same request on multiple occasions:
Do the thing - Varrick

[Eldan]

I don't think they'll do it. They've learned from AD&D and third edition: don't make books that not everyone will buy. It's why they have almost totally stopped printing setting books, because not everyone buys every setting. And if they had several balance points, many people will only buy splats for one or two balance points, and they'll spend money designing and printing material not everyone can use in every campaign. SO basically, not going to happen.

[gooddragon1]

I don't think they'll do it. They've learned from AD&D and third edition: don't make books that not everyone will buy. It's why they have almost totally stopped printing setting books, because not everyone buys every setting. And if they had several balance points, many people will only buy splats for one or two balance points, and they'll spend money designing and printing material not everyone can use in every campaign. SO basically, not going to happen.

I had a feeling something like this might happen, but I didn't think about this specifically. Makes sense. Unfortunate though.

[Eldan]

It's commonly cited as one reason among many why TSR went down. A dozen settings with very specific niches, like Dark Sun, Planescape, Ravenloft, which required very specific material. The people who liked them liked them a lot, but the people who didn't like those settings never bought the boxes.

[gooddragon1]

I get the feeling 3.5 does this loosely. There are tiers of classes, ad hoc cr where some encounters may be more or less effective, the force enhancement making archers stronger, the

Spoiler: don't look if you like 3.5 psionics, even the title is harmful

Show

complete psionics book

Thus with good system knowledge you could make the balance point you want. And with bad system knowledge you end up with tier 5's in a tier 1 game.

Like pointers in programming. Powerful, useful, and risky.

[Eldan]

That's all fan work, though. WotC never came out and told you "Don't buy Tome of Battle if you think normal martial classes are balanced in your game" or "warning: this book contains very powerful spells" or "Don't build a truenamer if you have any remotely competent people in your group".

[Morty]

D&D 3E has different points of balance on accident, as a result of design mistakes and intentional catering to spellcaster supremacy. "Tiers" and such are players trying to make sense of it all and arrive at a functional game.

It would be interesting to see an edition that supports it on purpose. Eldan is right, though, that making separate content for it wouldn't work. It'd need to work as modules applied to one set of rules.

[gooddragon1]

Yeah, I guess it is by accident. Incredible. They stumbled across it.

As a result I'm bewildered by just the thought of a system doing it on purpose.

[Vhaidara]

It would be interesting to see an edition that supports it on purpose. Eldan is right, though, that making separate content for it wouldn't work. It'd need to work as modules applied to one set of rules.

I think the system you're looking for is called Exalted. Each Exalt type is explicitly a different balance points. Solars are just straight up stronger than than Lunars, who are straight up stronger than Dragonblood. Mixed parties are possible, but require either acceptance of party imbalance or some kind of additional advantage given to the lower power exalts

[Morty]

Yeah, I guess it is by accident. Incredible. They stumbled across it.

As a result I'm bewildered by just the thought of a system doing it on purpose.

Plenty of systems have in fact already done it.

I think the system you're looking for is called Exalted. Each Exalt type is explicitly a different balance points. Solars are just straight up stronger than than Lunars, who are straight up stronger than Dragonblood. Mixed parties are possible, but require either acceptance of party imbalance or some kind of additional advantage given to the lower power exalts

I'm very familiar with Exalted, yes.

[Psyren]

Do we need a "6e?" They're barely releasing content for 5th as it is.

I'd rather see them release official versions of other genres entirely using the now-ubiquitous design principles of 5th - like modern, cyberpunk, space opera, alternate history, steampunk etc.

[AdAstra]

Do we need a "6e?" They're barely releasing content for 5th as it is.

I'd rather see them release official versions of other genres entirely using the now-ubiquitous design principles of 5th - like modern, cyberpunk, space opera, alternate history, steampunk etc.

Other than the fact that new genres will definitely not help with the content drought, I agree wholeheartedly. The current d20 system is incredibly solid and easy to pick up, and with bounded accuracy can be used for basically any setting where characters are intended to be even remotely grounded, while still offering a decent amount of granularity.

[gooddragon1]

Do we need a "6e?" They're barely releasing content for 5th as it is.

I'd rather see them release official versions of other genres entirely using the now-ubiquitous design principles of 5th - like modern, cyberpunk, space opera, alternate history, steampunk etc.

I felt the same way about 3.5 and psionics. We got 2 books. There was 1 ToB and nothing in ToB for ranged. Homebrew is a thing, but my point stands. So as a result I wouldn't feel too bad if they did drop 5e for something less stringently focused on one balance point to the point of exacerbating meta slavery. A more robust system preferably. I mean, you already spend the time meeting up and thinking out the story, why save time on the other stuff when you could have a more robust system? Seems pennywise and pound foolish imo, especially when computer games do balance and speed way better than 5e :/. Meh. We'll just have to see what wotc decides.

[jjordan]

I'd like to see D&D 6e go to a skill-based system with standard templates for the classes, implement a robust e-publishing system to reduce costs and production times as well as allow for periodic content updates and errata, and leverage the creativity of the community with online tools that allow the community to connect and share their creativity while strengthening the WotC brand.

[gooddragon1]

I'd like to see D&D 6e go to a skill-based system with standard templates for the classes, implement a robust e-publishing system to reduce costs and production times as well as allow for periodic content updates and errata, and leverage the creativity of the community with online tools that allow the community to connect and share their creativity while strengthening the WotC brand.

I'm liking it. It does sound interesting and customizable... can always lock things in afterwards, but the initial option by default in tandem with the flexibility to allow the system to allow different approaches even if you did a more locked in approach or had some players modular and others fixed. I am liking it.

[Cluedrew]

The current d20 system is incredibly solid and easy to pick up,

As compared to what? Earlier editions of D&D?

I had a "What do you want changed for 6th edition" thread planned. But since this is here I'll throw in my biggest (which is not to say most likely) hope for future editions of D&D. I want combat to be sped up even more. The best combats I have ever been in took 6 roles to resolve. That would be a very short combat in D&D. For all the great moments that have happened in combat, there seems to always be an excess of rounds of waiting for those moments to come. Maybe getting rid of the "you will fight multiple (usually meaningless) fights a day" culture that surrounds the game would help.

In the grand scheme of things, this is a pretty unlikely idea. Combat is part of the core of D&D and in my mind to its detriment in a few cases. But not everyone agrees with that.

To jjordan: The greater focus on skills I am on board with, most of my homebrew systems are skill based for a reason.

[Rhedyn]

Well the Kickstarter for Worlds Without Number should be next year, so that (Written by Kevin Crawford, the author of Stars Without Number).

So the point of D&D 6e? Steal good ideas from OSR games. 2d6 skill system with d20 combat to get rid of the silly swing in skills. An intricate magic item crafting system (including flying castles) like in the Rules Cyclopedia.

I could also go for a Black Hack 2e, but redone with WotC production values and maybe Foci like in Stars Without Number to add character customization. I imagine that would look a lot like traditional fantasy Numenera.

[Psyren]

Other than the fact that new genres will definitely not help with the content drought, I agree wholeheartedly. The current d20 system is incredibly solid and easy to pick up, and with bounded accuracy can be used for basically any setting where characters are intended to be even remotely grounded, while still offering a decent amount of granularity.

More importantly, you don't have to teach the masses a new core mechanic. For most people, D&D is the only TTRPG they'll ever play, why not use a familiar gaming "language" to get them to step outside the comfort zone of elves and dwarves and maidens fair?

I felt the same way about 3.5 and psionics. We got 2 books. There was 1 ToB and nothing in ToB for ranged. Homebrew is a thing, but my point stands. So as a result I wouldn't feel too bad if they did drop 5e for something less stringently focused on one balance point to the point of exacerbating meta slavery.

Those were subsystems though, there's a limit to how much material you can put out for a subsystem anyway. The game as a whole still got a bevy of content. (With that said - psionics had way, way more content than just two books.)

A more robust system preferably. I mean, you already spend the time meeting up and thinking out the story, why save time on the other stuff when you could have a more robust system? Seems pennywise and pound foolish imo, especially when computer games do balance and speed way better than 5e :/. Meh. We'll just have to see what wotc decides.

Personally I'd be very skeptical of large mechanical changes. I definitely don't think you can go much lighter than 5e did and still be D&D. And you certainly can't go heavier than 3rd. Somewhere between the two? But that's what PF2 is trying to do and it just feels... extraneous.

[Rhedyn]

I definitely don't think you can go much lighter than 5e did and still be D&D.

The Black Hack 2e.

Most certainly D&D, it's a $6 PDF read. Give it a shot. It's a rules light game with a ton of GM tools.

[kieza]

What I could see working is a set of core books which contain well-balanced material, and then put the cool but broken material into clearly-labeled splatbooks.

[Ignimortis]

Well, on-topic...
1) Drop the "normal adventure day" balancing. I have never, in my 7 years with TTRPGs, mostly D&D, seen an adventuring day go as "5-6 encounters". I very rarely even saw a day with more than 3 fights. Most fun fights were actually a single deadly combat after which you could have a long rest or something. The adventuring day paradigm is also harmful since it doesn't allow for anything at-will to be powerful or fun.

2) Either curb spellcaster narrative growth significantly or make martials grow too. A Wizard 1 and Wizard 20 are incomparable. One can put a guy to sleep, the other can rip open portals to other planes, warp reality itself, or, at least, summon meteor showers. A Fighter 1 and Fighter 20 are basically the same, it's just that Fighter 20 hits harder and faster and can take more damage.

Alternatively, get rid of the 20-levels scheme. 5e already doesn't need 20 levels and it shows. You can easily condense everything in 5e to 10 levels, maybe even 8. You can adjust proficiency to those, 1-10 isn't much harsher on bounded accuracy than 2-6.

[Rhedyn]

Well, on-topic...
1) Drop the "normal adventure day" balancing. I have never, in my 7 years with TTRPGs, mostly D&D, seen an adventuring day go as "5-6 encounters". I very rarely even saw a day with more than 3 fights. Most fun fights were actually a single deadly combat after which you could have a long rest or something. The adventuring day paradigm is also harmful since it doesn't allow for anything at-will to be powerful or fun.

2) Either curb spellcaster narrative growth significantly or make martials grow too. A Wizard 1 and Wizard 20 are incomparable. One can put a guy to sleep, the other can rip open portals to other planes, warp reality itself, or, at least, summon meteor showers. A Fighter 1 and Fighter 20 are basically the same, it's just that Fighter 20 hits harder and faster and can take more damage.

Alternatively, get rid of the 20-levels scheme. 5e already doesn't need 20 levels and it shows. You can easily condense everything in 5e to 10 levels, maybe even 8. You can adjust proficiency to those, 1-10 isn't much harsher on bounded accuracy than 2-6.

You should check out DCCRPG and/or The Black Hack 2e.

The max is level is 10 and a level 1 Fighter is nothing compared to a level 10 fighter. The mighty deed die in DCCRPG is like if a battle master could use on of his superiority die maneuvers every attack. While in The Black Hack 2e, a level 10 fighter can attack 10 separate enemies (or less for bigger hits) and with the way the system works, they are just much more dangerous to stronger monsters than a level 1.

I think a lot of you guys would find the D&D you want in OSR games. My recommendation is Stars Without Number, until the author makes his traditional fantasy game for next year (though SWN plus Codex of the Black Sun is all you need for a fantasy game). I recommend that system because it has customization bits like foci (feats on roids) that would keep a more modern gamer entertained.

[Anonymouswizard]

Do we need a "6e?" They're barely releasing content for 5th as it is.

I'd rather see them release official versions of other genres entirely using the now-ubiquitous design principles of 5th - like modern, cyberpunk, space opera, alternate history, steampunk etc.

But I already own good games in all of those genres, some of which do things that the 5e structure can't allow (noncombat focus, detailed sanity mechanics, more flexible character creation...). Why do I need a cyberpunk game based on the 5e engine when I own Cyberpunnk? (as well as Shadowrun and Eclipse Phase, I like science fiction a lot*.) Or a modern day version when I really like Unknown Armies. Or any of these when I own not only Savage Worlds, but also Fate, Fuzion, and GURPS?

In fact, a big problem with 5e is that all the roleplaying mechanics were outdated when the game was released. They're so tacked on that they just get ignored, compared to Aspects in Fate, Triggers in Unknown Armies, Shock Gauges in Unknown Armies 3e, or other mechanics systems have been build around.

* Counting it, I own 8 different science fiction games, not counting SF/fantasy crosses but including a Steampunk game. I own about as many pure fantasy games, but one is a retroclone and two are solidly Urban Fantasy.

I'd like to see D&D 6e go to a skill-based system with standard templates for the classes, implement a robust e-publishing system to reduce costs and production times as well as allow for periodic content updates and errata, and leverage the creativity of the community with online tools that allow the community to connect and share their creativity while strengthening the WotC brand.

But I own GURPS, why do I need another GURPS?

In all seriousness, I'd enjoy it if 6e wasn't a thing. In fact, if WotC just quietly stopped selling D&D books I couldn't care less, I haven't bought one in over a year (and that was a third party one).

[Brookshw]

I'd like to see D&D 6e go to a skill-based system with standard templates for the classes, implement a robust e-publishing system to reduce costs and production times as well as allow for periodic content updates and errata, and leverage the creativity of the community with online tools that allow the community to connect and share their creativity while strengthening the WotC brand.

I expect this is pretty close to what they'll end up doing, offering people the opportunity to monetize homebrew in exchange for a cut as they do with the DM's Guild, coupled with further leaning into a quasi-SaaS model as they've started to with D&D beyond. Print products will continue to go away, not because of costs associated with print, but because they don't get a piece of the resale market. Can't imagine (or at least I seriously hope) they won't go completely away from print, but we'll see.

[Psyren]

The Black Hack 2e.

Most certainly D&D, it's a $6 PDF read. Give it a shot. It's a rules light game with a ton of GM tools.

I'm good thanks. I could have been clearer - I'm personally not interested in anything lighter than 5e.

Well, on-topic...
1) Drop the "normal adventure day" balancing. I have never, in my 7 years with TTRPGs, mostly D&D, seen an adventuring day go as "5-6 encounters". I very rarely even saw a day with more than 3 fights. Most fun fights were actually a single deadly combat after which you could have a long rest or something. The adventuring day paradigm is also harmful since it doesn't allow for anything at-will to be powerful or fun.

Okay, this is a very fair point; I would love to see a system that is built around a different resource than x/day. Like, if someone took either Recharge Magic or Mana/Spell Points (along with other ways for them to recharge besides resting) and made them a lot more functional, you could end up with as many encounters in a day as you could possibly want, and/or "days" that span across multiple sessions.

2) Either curb spellcaster narrative growth significantly or make martials grow too. A Wizard 1 and Wizard 20 are incomparable. One can put a guy to sleep, the other can rip open portals to other planes, warp reality itself, or, at least, summon meteor showers. A Fighter 1 and Fighter 20 are basically the same, it's just that Fighter 20 hits harder and faster and can take more damage.

Alternatively, get rid of the 20-levels scheme. 5e already doesn't need 20 levels and it shows. You can easily condense everything in 5e to 10 levels, maybe even 8. You can adjust proficiency to those, 1-10 isn't much harsher on bounded accuracy than 2-6.

I think condensing levels is a fine idea; martials keeping perfect parity with magic-users less so.

But I already own good games in all of those genres, some of which do things that the 5e structure can't allow (noncombat focus, detailed sanity mechanics, more flexible character creation...). Why do I need a cyberpunk game based on the 5e engine when I own Cyberpunnk? (as well as Shadowrun and Eclipse Phase, I like science fiction a lot*.) Or a modern day version when I really like Unknown Armies. Or any of these when I own not only Savage Worlds, but also Fate, Fuzion, and GURPS?

You may not, but there's an untapped market for many others who aren't going to give something like GURPS or Savage Worlds even the merest glance, nor frankly should they be forced to.

In all seriousness, I'd enjoy it if 6e wasn't a thing. In fact, if WotC just quietly stopped selling D&D books I couldn't care less, I haven't bought one in over a year (and that was a third party one).

Like it or not, D&D introduced many folks to this hobby that wouldn't have otherwise even tried it. WotC stopping isn't going to make any of these more obscure systems suddenly attractive.

[Anonymouswizard]

You may not, but there's an untapped market for many others who aren't going to give something like GURPS or Savage Worlds even the merest glance, nor frankly should they be forced to.

The problem is that Cyber5e is just going to be a worse Cyberpunk game than Cyberpunk (which, if Red is released at the same time as 2077, might be seeing an upswing in popularity in the next year or so). Then there are the even more niche games that 5e clones aren't going to go into because it's not worth shaping the system to fit.

Take In Nomine. Now the biggest problem I have with running it is that one player in the group I'm refuses to play anything even touching the mythology the game draws from (annoyingly stopping me from doing anything thematically complex with fiends and celestials in any game), but it's not only such a specific niche of urban fantasy that a 5e clone is unlikely to touch it, but the very setup doesn't support a class structure. Sure you could shoehorn one in, seven Heavenly classes, seven Infernal ones, maybe a handful for mortal Soldiers, then use Feats for such things as Servitor Attunements, but the game flows much more naturall from a race+skill setup.

But here's the thing, I've never had a problem with people playing D&D (unless you're forcing me to play only it, I have hundreds of pounds invested in other games). I've had a problem with torturing the mechanics of D&D to play genre X when there's games right there which will do it perfect, and likely for less than you paid for D&D. IF you want Firefly you could make D&D kind of work if you squint, or you can buy Scum & Villainy for less than £20, notice how one of the player ships is modelled after Serenity and that the Playbooks map very nicely to the crew, and have some fun with a new system.

But those people who do 'D&D but X'? I don't think they'd go out and buy '5e space opera' instead of just sitting at home and trying to rework D&D. Even worse it runs the risk of getting into the 2e setting problems, just with a bunch of different genres instead of worlds. Would a Dungeons & Dragons ffan be interested in a Perils & Planets book? How about a Chrome & Copper one? Fairies & Firearms? Pistons & Petticoats? Knights & Knaves? Devils & Demiurges?

Like it or not, D&D introduced many folks to this hobby that wouldn't have otherwise even tried it. WotC stopping isn't going to make any of these more obscure systems suddenly attractive.

Eh, it's not going to make them any less attractive. Honestly the bit that disappoints me is that my local game store obviously puts the RPGs it expects to sell next to D&D (so that's where you can find the Middle Earth, Warhammer, and other big names), and yet whenever I go in I always see at least one person buying D&D (sometimes their second or third copy of the book) and nobody buying the other downstairs RPGs. Although I've seen those bought more than the upstairs ones.

But the reality is, I don't care. I don't want WotC to stop selling D&D books, I don't want them to make more. I'm over buying more D&D, I don't care about it at all, and I almost have every D&D book I want anyway (just need to grab a PoD version of the Rules Cyclopedia to go with my pdf). If they stopped printing them and let it die I wouldn't care, if they printed a hundred next year I wouldn't care. I'll just try to get people to play In Nomine instead, I like the themes more.

[Morty]

Take In Nomine. Now the biggest problem I have with running it is that one player in the group I'm refuses to play anything even touching the mythology the game draws from (annoyingly stopping me from doing anything thematically complex with fiends and celestials in any game), but it's not only such a specific niche of urban fantasy that a 5e clone is unlikely to touch it, but the very setup doesn't support a class structure. Sure you could shoehorn one in, seven Heavenly classes, seven Infernal ones, maybe a handful for mortal Soldiers, then use Feats for such things as Servitor Attunements, but the game flows much more naturall from a race+skill setup.

But here's the thing, I've never had a problem with people playing D&D (unless you're forcing me to play only it, I have hundreds of pounds invested in other games). I've had a problem with torturing the mechanics of D&D to play genre X when there's games right there which will do it perfect, and likely for less than you paid for D&D. IF you want Firefly you could make D&D kind of work if you squint, or you can buy Scum & Villainy for less than £20, notice how one of the player ships is modelled after Serenity and that the Playbooks map very nicely to the crew, and have some fun with a new system.

But those people who do 'D&D but X'? I don't think they'd go out and buy '5e space opera' instead of just sitting at home and trying to rework D&D. Even worse it runs the risk of getting into the 2e setting problems, just with a bunch of different genres instead of worlds. Would a Dungeons & Dragons ffan be interested in a Perils & Planets book? How about a Chrome & Copper one? Fairies & Firearms? Pistons & Petticoats? Knights & Knaves? Devils & Demiurges?

Yeah. D&D works, for a certain degree of "working", in its own narrow genre of fantasy. Trying to adapt those mechanics to other genres would be hammering a square peg into a round hole. There's nothing particularly special about D&D mechanics that would make it worth the effort, either. Such a game might still outsell other RPGs due to having WotC's marketing behind it, but... how is that a good thing again?

[Brookshw]

But those people who do 'D&D but X'? I don't think they'd go out and buy '5e space opera' instead of just sitting at home and trying to rework D&D. Even worse it runs the risk of getting into the 2e setting problems, just with a bunch of different genres instead of worlds. Would a Dungeons & Dragons ffan be interested in a Perils & Planets book? How about a Chrome & Copper one? Fairies & Firearms? Pistons & Petticoats? Knights & Knaves? Devils & Demiurges?

Don't know why you think that. Modern/Future/Apocalypse/Legend of the Five Rings and all the other 3/3.5e D20 spinoffs were fine (at least those that I played) and I can say for my group we were happy to shell out a bit of cash rather than have to homebrew up such a massive amount of content. There is certainly a market out there. Whether the ROI outweighs the opportunity costs is another matter and a valid question.

Yeah. D&D works, for a certain degree of "working", in its own narrow genre of fantasy. Trying to adapt those mechanics to other genres would be hammering a square peg into a round hole. There's nothing particularly special about D&D mechanics that would make it worth the effort, either. Such a game might still outsell other RPGs due to having WotC's marketing behind it, but... how is that a good thing again?

Sure, but many other games do a terrible job of what they're designed for. Shadowrun is terrible at being Shadowrun, the system and character development is clunky, the different sub-games a'la hacking/magic can split the party something fierce so people sit around twiddling thumbs waiting for someone's private adventure to end. Reasonably streamlined mechanics are what sell people, toss in something familiar and it's even easier. Having to learn a few hundred of pages of rules to play a game before you even know if you'll like it is a far higher barrier to entry than picking up a game that uses mechanics which are already familiar to you.