Dungeons and Dragons

[Clay Dreslough]

Wow. WotC already announced D&D 5th Edition.

Years between editions:

1st to 2nd: 15 years
2nd to 3rd: 11 years
3rd to 4th: 8 years
4th to 5th: 4 years

Either each version is getting worse, thus requiring a rewrite. Or they are money-grubbing DBs. Or both.

[Jayeburgh]

No reason to purchase anything past 3.5. To be honest, G.U.R.P.S works better for D+D than D+D, in my opinion.


Edit: They are money grubbing db's that ruined a great game.

[Arctic Blast]

I actually prefer 4th edition. All that 3.5 had over 4th is a pile of needless book keeping. Climb, swim, etc. didn't all need to be separate skills, for example. Chop it down and make it Athletics and Acrobatics, covering everything in a way that makes sense (and they did).

Besides, if you preferred 3.5, you've got Pathfinder.

5th sounds like the making of a disaster, though. Trying to please everyone usually ends up pleasing nobody at all.

[CatKnight]

Actually your numbers are slightly off Clay:
1st to 2nd: 11 years (1978-1989)

And that doesn't include the various versions of Basic, but they're not considered in which edition is which.

Fourth edition is an abomination. The fact that Pathfinder outsells 4th pretty much speaks for itself. The growing strength of retroclones that focus on everything from the LBB (1974 brown/white box) through the various versions of Basic D&D and AD&D 1st just adds to the argument.

I suspect what WotC is hoping to do is bring everyone back in: Keep enough of 4th to satisfy the....players....who prefer that, while re-adding role playing elements lost from earlier editions, hence the 5th edition.

To be honest, though I am hopeful I don't see it happening. D&D Basic or AD&D 1st has little in common with D&D 3.5 and almost nothing with D&D 4. It's not only a question of mechanics - in the end that's very minor. It has everything to do with gameplay, tone, and survivability. A character in earlier editions was far more fragile than in D&D 3.5/4. Until D&D 3.0, most combats could be handled 'on the cuff' without mats or other gameboards. From about 1st through 3.5 (not much before and close to zero since) there was a high emphasis on RPing versus tactical encounters.

WotC needs to pick a niche and stay there. If they want to keep things as they are - fine. They'll lose some players, but those players are currently lost anyway so no further damage is done. If they want to emulate the older games more - fine, but they risk alienating anyone who's joined in the last 4 years.

Or they could just be money-grubbing gits. Since v 3.5 was dissimilar enough to 3.0 to suggest getting new books, so 3.0 only lasted about 4 years as well, I think this likely.