The sixth edition of Dungeons and Dragons is in development, and Wizards of the Coast calls on you to help them!

What, do you like casters being stronger than martials?

>implying skill challenges aren't just a name for something that was happening naturally
>implying balanced encounter means "unloseable" encounter
>implying de-emphasizing tactics in a game with heavy origins in wargaming is a bad thing

This is a DnD thread, not a MTG thread.

More complex skill trees with higher specialization

How about making a new edition that isn't a whole different game from the previous one? You know, like ad&d 1e (1977) to ad&d 2e revised (1995).

Just fucking stay with 5e mechanics and try to improve from that starting point

>reduce monks MAD further
>add in a risk reward factor to magic use, and remind DM's that spells are very obvious, easy to stop casting, and frequently is very rude.
>more class options
>balanced monster races for evil campains

>casters being stronger than martials
>d4 hit die
>shit AC
>casters go last in initiative
>if you are hit you lose your spell
it's like you don't have a clue what you're talking about

>stay with 5e mechanics and try to improve from that starting point
But if you climb upwards from shit you'll end up with less shit, but still shit.

>Wizards of the Coast calls on you to help them!

I tell them I don't work for pedophiles.

>he spends his time rolling dice instead of actually playing the game
>he tailors the world to his PCs
>he thinks adding complexity equals adding depth
ishygddt

In a serious note, I recommend reading through 1e's DMG and PHB. They're amazing fountains of insight.

4E 2.0, get some licensed video games running ASAP.

>implying wizards are the only casters

>smug anime poster
drink bleach please

Wizards are d6 hit die, can get good AC with decent dex and improve with mage armour, initiative depends on dex, you only lose the spell if you fail a concentration saving throw (and the spell is concentration)

Reprint 4e
Spend the rest on hired saboteurs to explode Paizo.

Fuck off you unsleeved media pepe posting edgelord

They're sabotaging themselves already.

>implying they are not
>implying clerics & druids do not have less powerful spells and also follow the same rules

>holding up a sign saying "I am retarded "
This is you right now

Subclasses were a good move, but I say borrow Key Modifiers and a little bit of the implementation of the Track system from Open Legend.

They've been selling 4e stuff digitally for a good while on DTRPG.

>Paizo
>relevant outside /pfg/
4e's failings were its own.

Legend, not Open Legend.

Right, skill challenges are just a name for a series of checks. You don't announce "hey, here's a SKILL CHALLENGE!", it just happens. It's a way to avoid always going for combat. And, really, it's presenting your players with a problem and them seeking out a solution. As for tailoring the world to the PCs, well, generally that happens by itself. And I don't mean adding needless complexity, just adding depth, really, which in all honesty D&D lacks heavily.

I've given them a read, they're very useful resources for understanding what was the original intent of the game.
4e would be pretty bad for videogames, all things told. Too many reactions.

Ah, right, my mistake.

Take 5e and polish up the bits that have been received poorly in years of public play (the ranger, the sorcerer, the vague rules on stealth, some of the spells, etc.). The DMG especially sees heavy rework, including much more guidance for creating homebrew material. Keep it as compatible with old 5e material as possible. Continue 5e's slow release schedule and continue to support streaming and further expand the game's userbase. Print money by the basketload and make D&D a cultural phenomenon again.

And god dammit, get a proper, centralized digital release platform. Base it on D&D Beyond with PDF downloads available, with a system to connect book purchases with PDFs, so people will stop bitching. The game is already being given away mostly for free and the books are more and more successful even with piracy, stop shooting yourself in the foot, WotC.

Make catfolk and other weeb shit a base component of the game.

>But if you climb upwards from shit you'll end up with less shit, but still shit.

It doesn't matter, the new edition will be seen as shit as for every past edition, so, better stick with a design choice, to build a solid identity and improve the game until reaching its very dead end... then it will be time to revolutionize the core mechanics.

>skill challenges
As you said, it's something that already sort of existed. Yeah, they may not be so bad.

>World
Nah senpai, the world should be its separate thing. For example, random encounter tables are the same whether you are level 1 or 20. Wander about in the forest? Wolves. Underdark? Hook Horrors.
Of course, this requires a system that doesn't scale upwards in power too steply.

>Depth
I'm not sure you need anything beyond a system to resolve actions in combat (attack roll, regardless of attack type, weapon...) and one out of it (ability checks, with maybe 2e proficiencies determining whether you can even attempt the action or if you get a bonus)

What kind of sociopathic, predatory scumbag would do that, just come onto the internet and post frog pictures?

>Skill Challenges
They're really not, it's just awful terminology.

>World
Yeah, 4e scales in power quite ridiculously, and if you're ever shooting for anything like it, you pretty much need to do a bit of tailoring for it to work out. You can tailor the narrative to the PCs, however, so you don't end up with stuff like that. But for example, supposing you're fighting against the evil empire by inciting a rebellion. At first they're just gonna send a few men to stop it, but if it gets too out of hand, maybe they'll start sending a more elite regiment and so forth. The world doesn't bend to the PCs, the narrative does.

>Depth
It depends on how much you focus on the game part of it. d6-lite is a perfect example of something with low emphasis on the G of RPG and it's a really good game for what it is - super lightweight, borderline freeform RPG. On the other hand, an RPG with good G design can be far more interesting, but that's one of the main issues with RPG design - how much you focus on G areas and on RP areas. They're not mutually exclusive, naturally, but generally you need to balance the whole thing out.

Stop posting touhou it's for autistic pedophiles

>Go entirely digital. Sell the experience as combination VTT/Video game.
>Make sure it's usable from a smart phone.
>Give it away for free and let people mod the crap out of it if it tickles their fancy, or run on their own servers if they like.
>Charge $1 an hour to host a game (DMing it yourself) on their servers. Hosted servers also allow you to socialize, join PUGs, and organize your campaign.
>Computer DM'd casual adventures and raids with matchmaking

You might say some of the essence of D&D is lost, but all I see are bags of money and a seven digit playerbase.

Make a videogame and put all the "diversity" character creation items behind lootboxes.

20,000% more trannies

>Update BECMI

Bring back the Primal power source.

Continue finding ways to give classes distinct 'overworld' skills and make sure 'low skill' classes like fighters don't get sent back to 3.P 2 skill points hell.

Continue using traits and backgrounds. Make sure they are in tables that could be rolled without a curve.

Come on now user, you have to at least TRY to disguise the bait

Make Eberron the standard setting.

Get rid of the six attributes, classes, and levels, and opt for a point by system. Ditch d20s while we are at it for a roll and keep system like L5R.

Take 5e, polish it up wherever it needs it, and then release a book dedicated solely to non-combat rules/systems/things, because 80% of the existing material is dedicated to combat.

Battle Master needed maneuvers with level prerequisites which did more when used. Or were more action efficient over time.

Like a commanders strike that offered attacks to more than one ally at once, or allowed for ranged attacks against a single target for multiple allies, or one that didn’t use up the BM’s bonus action, etc.

bring back mystara spelljammer and planescape and keep the dragonborn race in

Make everything super fucking racist, include edgy shit in the lore like rape cults and cannibalism.

If you're not talking about 5th editions gtfo.

>all those 4e fags
yes why not make the game more llike world of warcraft.

The thing is, you don't need to try. Ask anybody working at WotC and they'll probably agree with that statement.

FUCK FROHNALFG GROUOUMPH!!!

You say that and yet 3e is the one with the WoW books and an MMO...

I concur, doesn't take from the fact that 4e tried to imitate mmorpgs mechanically.

I wasn't aware that FFT was an MMO.

>FFT
I think it was not spesficially imtiating this or that, but a general trend

2007-2008 was the golden age of wowclones, and they just jumped into the bandwaggon. Thankfully they fixed a lot of their mistakes with 5e.

Make it simpler. Just reduce all the dissociated charop shit that makes me think more about my "build" than who my character is. Fuck it, remove half the classes and stupid races. Remove bonus actions entirely. Keep dis/advantage and binary proficiency (if you include skills at all).

Most importantly, fix the way the dying condition works.

Hmm, like Intel's tick/tock cycle. It could work. But why not just call it 5.5e?

They eat morons that say stuff like that.

Give westaboos and realismfags the middlefinger and go full Wuxia

>Continue 5e's slow release schedule
One of the good things you could say about 3.5 is that by the end of its lifespan, there were plenty of books that would let you enjoy it even if you absolutely fucking hated the core game. That will never be true of 5E.

Will this edition feature as many pedophiles as in the MTG judges program?

Go back to the In Combat/Out of Combat dichotomy in 4e, but all battles are now settled with Basketball.

Reprint B/X as a single volume, with ascending AC.

>more is better
fehh
>

Are you retarded or just illiterate?

Get with the times, and convert it into a quip-filled YA distopian novel with a DLC monthly fruit basket

>he tailors the world to his PCs
Anyone who has ever used a rust monster, ear seeker, mimic, cursed item, or trap has done this.

Get rid of ability modifiers. You add your whole ability score to rolls.

Dial back long rests so random encounters matter. Reinstate gold as exp. explicitly state DnD only runs fairly specific games well

Fire the design team of WOTC, buy Paizo, and basically just make more Pathfinder.

My group and I never moved past 3.5eam I missing anything?

No
4e was a fun departure from the standard model, but everyone shat on it and memed it out of existence by claiming it was trying to be WoW
5e is just 3.5e with Bounded Accuracy

>Actually make it so a only a third of the rules content are for combat by introducing interesting social and exploration mechanics. >Design classes from the ground up so the all have a careful selection of abilities for all pillars of DnD, instead of this nonsense of barbarians being 100% combat focused.
>redo the core mechanic so that it isn't just a pass/fail d20 roll, instead offering different flavors of "succeed with bonus/penalty" and "fail with bonus/penalty"
>do combat in theater of the mind ranges of "near"/"far"
>rebalance martials so they are supernaturally good at physical things, to bring them to the same power level as wizards.
>bring back skill points and differening passive modifiers to individual skills
>limit circumstantial modifiers to advantage/disadvantage.

Make spelljammer the default setting, because space is rad.
Make the entire game played with d6, because systems that require more than one type of die are not rad.

4e is pretty fun.
5e is a competent but ultimately boring resurrection of all the sacred cows that 4e killed. You can expect wizards to make fighters obsolete (but not right away), combat to be fairly boring and uninvolved (the game is balanced around doing the same action 99% of the time), and the non-combat to be mother-may-I with the DM due to lack of rules support.

Kill all the sacred cows by giving alternate rule options right off the bat, like classless and such. Eschew specific class descriptions, so no "Monk of X school". If you're a monk, you get to tell me what your martial arts look like.

Get rid of experience as a leveling mechanic. Give milestone guidelines and draw up the monster manual with the basic idea that some monsters are meant to be bosses (and therefore milestones)

generally yes. You can very easily ignore the bad when you have selection, but creating good from nothing is hard.

>Make it 4.3e
>Only put in the bare minimum in the rulebooks, things like additional races and classes (that were originally in the core rules) are now in expansion books.
>Only release Dragonlance supplement material.
>Books are quantity over quality.
>Build a toxic echo chamber of a community.
>Hire developers who are extremely hostile to the community.
>Take out all instances of roleplaying.
>Every NPC is either gay, bi, or trans.
>Remove Gygax & Dave's name from the special mention section, replace it with Mike Mearls listed twice.

I'll take "what is Paizo" for 500.

Because we don't need another company like Paizo creating Pathfinder 2.0 and loading down every LGS with uninspired modules, campaign guides, extra dense splatbooks and full size tomes of shitty material.

Hey, only about 3/4ths of those things mentioned are Paizo related.

I think the only thing I would add to that is Turn most of the current Classes into Sub-Classes
>Fightan Man - Fighter, Barbarian, Monk, Etc
>Magic Dude - Wizard, Sorcerer, Warlock, Etc
>Religioso - Cleric, Paladin, Druid, Etc
>Psychic Shitbag - Psion, Wilder, Soulknife, Etc

With of course some sub-classes that crossover like Eldritch Knight and such

Remove all non-combat related skilll and spells, they just get in the way anyway.

I know this is going to get me attacked, but I honestly don't see much I think should be changed that would justify a 6e. I could see something more like a 5.5e. Balance out a few things, take some lessons learned, that sort of thing.

But in regards to changing systems, I think 5e works very well.

Sure, there are plenty of personal preference things that I would change. But I don't think that would the same as saying 'we need a 6e'.

>Actually make it so a only a third of the rules content are for combat by introducing interesting social and exploration mechanics.

But what is that? I see people complaining about this now and then, a lack of 'social combat' stuff. But I just don't understand the need for it.

As a DM, I handle that stuff based on the situation. I really don't want, and would not use, a complex system that handles social interactions for characters as a set of rules. Hell, it is a social game and we are social animals. I feel like we can handle that stuff without game rules.

So what am I missing here?

There are two main complaints:

1. Some classes have absolutely no ability to interact socially except for the rules available to every class. This creates numerous situations where if you have a combat light game (or even just a game where combat is only 1/3rd of the action, as is supposedly normal), players can feel like they're useless for most of it.

2. A lack of rules generally for it. As a DM I've encountered numerous scenarios where players argue that something doesn't make sense socially when they fail. Part of this is a player vetting issue. But having more detailed rules for social interaction can help to enrich roleplay and the cooperative storytelling, while also giving the DM or player something to point to when one party disagrees on something's validity.

An example of rules enriching gameplay would be something like out of DnD 3.0 or 3.5 where a high enough bluff check could be treated as a casting of suggestion. This gave players new options for social builds, rewarded focus in social matters, and enriched storytelling by providing further guidance on what the outcome of the social skill was: your words were so convincing that the listener was almost supernaturally charmed by them.

It's also worth noting that providing more rules to players and DMs wouldn't hurt you. You can always choose to ignore what you don't like or find to bothersome to bother with. But it is more difficult for a DM to make up rules themselves, especially while they are just starting out.

I see where you are coming from on the social point. But i just don't agree. I think a set of more vague skills, about what 5e has, is the best way to go. Heck, most of the time I don't even bother with those. Just go strictly from what the players are saying/acting and how the NPC would react.

I do agree that some of the classes could benefit from some non-direct combat abilities. I presume you are talking mostly about fighters here. If so, I pretty much agree. I would like to see the fighter get some inspiring leadership type abilities. Maybe some strategic army leading stuff. It would have been a nice set of skills for the fighter to pick up as a set of choices every few levels.

I would like to see a second look at the old 1e/2e rules for building keeps and using/having henchmen with them aimed primarily at the fighter.

That's a fair point, the "General" archetype is pretty much missing. I do feel a Fighter should be an intimidating presence at least, or given the chance to use his muscles or tactics as a negotiation tool.

Also 4e was the one that streamlined it.

Not from my point of view. I started with basic/1e, played that for a few years. Then really came in to my own with 2e. Did that for a good while. Skipped 3e/pf/4e. From my perspective 5e has plenty complicated the skill area well enough.

But from what I saw of 3e looking through it (mostly from computer games), I see what you mean.

I'd actually like to see 4e get revisited a bit to be honest. I think it deserved a little bit more love than what it got. I'd have rather seen it re-branded as 'Chain mail'.

Build a specific skirmish level D&D game based on the 4e rules. I think 4e could handle that just fine. Then give a set of rules that allow for RP actions to go with it.

So you play the skirmish level game for the castle assault, and the RP part for the actions in the castle by the principles.

I'd unironically be all over a petal-to-the-metal superhero fantasy game if they got enough of an art budget have all the illustrations be in the style of Yoshiaka Kawajiri and Takeshi Koike's shit.

Here's my suggestions:

>1. You have a specific release schedule and release 4 or 5 books a year.

These can be in the form of more PHB supplements like XGE, a large module like CoS or TOA, more support for DMs like Volos and the DM related sections of XGE. But most importantly, every year a book is released that either updates or publishes a new campaign setting for this new 6th edition. My current list of setting updates are: Faerun (if they want to stick to it being the "vanilla" setting), Eberron, Greyhawk, Spelljammer + Planescape (they're similar enough to be merged into one book), Dark Sun, Mystara.

>2. Better rules to help DMs balance homebrew stuff made by them or brought to them by players.

Part of it is aimed to help DMs and players be creative, but it's also to help curtail some of the power curve issues people have with most homebrewed things in 5e right now.

>3. Have each class draw upon their powers from a similar Power, ala 4e.

For all the crap we tend to give 4e, them dividing up the various types of Power for classes in 4th was actually pretty good, and they eventually gave multiple options for each combat roll to fill for all of the Powers they introduced.

>4. Every class feels unique and - by in large - sits on a pretty even playing field in terms of power level.

5th done a pretty good job up to this point with power levels, the biggest outliers being Paladin being great for nova damage, base Ranger being very underwhelming (which they fixed), and Sorcerer being the second worst class to go a full 20 levels into.

>5. No matter what gets published, make a core tenant of games in AL and home games be the Core books + 3 splat books that the DM picks from.

This will provide enough options for players to make their characters and not require DMs to feel like they have to own half of the ediition's worth of books to balance shit out for their games and for the AL stuff.

>6. Have a dedicated digital presence.

PDFs of books through D&D Beyond.

>But why not just call it 5.5e?
It depends. If the improvements leave, more or less, the game not so different from 5e (like 3e to 3.5e), it would be more reasonanle to call it 'revised edition' (as for the 'ad&d 2e revised'). Otherwise, as in a situation like ad&d 1e to ad&d 2e, the differences are so many that we can talk of a very new edition.

you're going to love the next setting book for 5e mid next year.

...

I'd like something a bit closer to a modernized Moldvay/Cook Basic in a single volume. Ascending AC, unified d20 mechanic, and significantly more options when it comes to classes and spells, but still very simple. Moldvay/Cook Basic is 128 pages in total, and I'd try to keep it to no more than twice that, not including Monsters. This would be all you would need to play, but there would be an "Advanced", "Expanded", "Expert" or whatever set that would complexify the game considerably, for folks who wanted that sort of thing, but the shit put out for 6th edition would be tailored towards being able to be used without the Advanced set.

Killing some sacred cows, armor would reduce damage, classes would modify your attributes (rather than granting you shit like bigger hit dice, it would boost constitution, which would affect your hit points), and mental attributes would be culled down to a single one. There would be a very simple characteristic / feat / whatever system, but that would be more geared towards making characters feel more different than providing mechanically-power character builds.

There would be a short, cheap player book (barely above cost, and free for digital) that would be all a new player would really need to know, without a bunch of other setting and GM shit to make it intimidating and harder to reference for the basics. All the crunch in the player book would be redundant with the core set.

Are they gonna release an Eberron guide ala Sword Coast Adventures?