Wotc's digital history is not good and dropping their lead provider makes me wonder if they may let both 3pp OGL and digital doors swing wide open. They are working hard for their Hollywood movie deal and anything that pushs core book sales and exposure ..... is good ?

Kinzer's setting contained no copyrighted materials at all.

You don't need OGL to do much. With regular copyright in effect. You are allowed to verbatim reference other people's materials. You aren't allowed to cut and paste.

One thing I like about 5e is that it is paper and pencil friendly in a way that none of the other games are. Its built to muck around with the setting's needs. I'm eying adapting Iron Kingdoms to 5th. Its a snap to mix in 3.5 materials. (Iron Kingdoms RPG is totally incompatible, so it would only take a little bit longer.)

Finding people whipping together other materials does not surprise me. I wish them luck.

Well, of the three D&D Next games run by folks that I know, two have gone back to Pathfinder, and the third has gone on to something else entirely (Serenity).

There is also one couple that has decided to skip both D&D Next and Pathfinder, and do their game for the old D&D Cyclopedia. (They almost did 5e, then they almost did DCC... but....)

That... is not as good as I expected. I was kind of hoping for a bit more love for the new game.

Maybe there just isn't enough out there for it, yet?

Others?

I preferred Pathfinder, anyway - but I was hoping that the new D&D would at least get some love.

The Auld Grump

From what I've been hearing, there's not quite enough there right now to keep it going long-term - at least, for a lot of the groups that I've played with. I think that will change as things develop and more options come out for the game (which, despite 3 books out for it already, is admittedly bare bones - though they do include rather a lot to guide you through adding your own stuff). The question is if it will survive long enough to have this potential realized or if it will fall away before that can happen.

I do see some potential in various campaign settings and a 'build your world' style splatbook, a la what's offered with Spycraft and FantasyCraft - but we'll have to see if they take it that direction, or if they go with the 'same but more' style of system that they've used previously for many of their campaign settings. Personally, I would love to see a Ravenloft that focused on the horror side of the system, Forgotten Realms that really captured the High Fantasy feel of the novels (without turning into a Monty Haul style game), or a really attention-grabbing Psionics system for their Dark Sun setting (heck, bring back Spelljammers and Planescape with their own twists and tricks!) I think that's where the strength of the system will really shine - but will they take it that way?

Ugh, ran across a description of the game as 'raging mediocrity with a likely broken late game.'

I... think that may be a bit harsh. (Though 'mediocre' does sum up my own feeling... if a tad more negatively than I would term it.) Mind you, that was on the Crafty forums - which is a tad biased.

5e doesn't suck... but it just doesn't seem to do anything better than games that are already on the market. If you want simplicity then there are games that do that better - including the old Rules Cyclopedia.

If you want a number crunching calculator frenzy then Pathfinder is better. (Pathfinder is my favored system for Fantasy - and for modern games I favor Spycraft 2.0 - another numbers heavy game.)

I think that 5e is better than 4e, though I also think that 4e did a lot of damage to D&D the property, and 5e... may not be enough to lift it back up. (4e was a fumbled Profession [Marketing] roll....)

The Auld Grump

Yeah, that is definitely an overly harsh review of the game. I agree that the game really isn't all there yet... But I can certainly see how it could get there. Mostly, they'll need to capitalize on the truly magnificent Campaigns that they have access to - and morph the rules to fit the setting rather than the setting to fit the rules, as they did so often with the 4e releases of the settings (and, to be fair, even some of the 3.X renditions of them).

If they focus on going that route - focusing on Campaign guides and supplemental material focused on fitting the new rules introduced in each 'wave' of product (let's say, a new set of sub-rules every few years, split evenly between Campaign-specific materials and generic 'Build your own' rule compendiums, which also give you a few variants to try out), I think they could have a winner - particularly as there really isn't much competition in that category (Pathfinder, Iron Kingdoms, Shadowrun, etc - all of them focus on matching one ruleset to the setting. Only Fate is really going for the one system, many worlds approach that really made D&D - both 2e and 3e - great; Crafty Games, with FantasyCraft and Spycraft, are close, but they're much more of the Build Your Own Setting types, and don't really have much related to specific settings).

Yeah, to be sure, when Pathfinder first came out, I was really frustrated at how long we had to wait for the Advanced Player's Guide to be released. Just the Core Rulebook was too boring and plain for me as a player. I wanted more options. Of course, my group started with Pathfinder when it was in Beta, so maybe it was a lot longer of a wait for us. It'll be most interesting to see what they do with 5e in the next year. They need to follow the core stuff up with supplements that seem interesting or worth the player's time to really build some interest.

Interesting. Our group dropped pathfinder precisely because there were too many options.
Every time we started a campaign with limited options one of the players saw a new release with a new shiny x and lobbied to try to get it in.

I don't like having to look through 15 books to figure out if what I have planned is going to chalenge my players.

Give me some core rules and some imagination/home made goodies and I can play for years.


That said, I do hope that Wizards goes in the lots of worlds with custom rules direction as I find that concept fascinating. As a bonus it would be easy to keep my players from looking at "setting" books, so I can spring what I want to borrow from them when they go to exotic lands to make them feel "alien"

We are loving 5e so far! Also, around here it seems rather popular. The books aren't flying off the shelves, but they aren't staying put for long either. Also, the DMG gets some of the best reviews I have seen of one ever. I am impressed with what there is so far.

I am anxious to see some setting specific stuff (Eberron), and to see what is done with things like psionics.

Well, webcartoonist John 'the Gneech' Robey - and is merrily converting his Pathfinder campaign over to it - and is working on . (He also really didn't like 4e... at all.)

So, the prospects for 5e may not be as grim as the local scene is making it appear.

There are folks that really like the new game, and who can give good arguments as to why that is the case.

The Auld Grump

Local scene for 5e is sadly pretty dead. I didn't expect a lot of enthusiasm, but the books just aren't going anywhere, and there aren't any games outside of the official WOTC campaign stuff. While I'm not terribly surprised by this (Pathfinder has taken so much root it's pretty much Yggdrasil at this point) it's pretty hard to get an honest appraisal of the game itself.

So far I like it, I played in two games, one that lost steam and one that is going strong.

I have to admit it has me itching to dust off my old Homebrew world from Second Edition.
If the DM calls it quits I just may do that.

Okay... it looks like there may be a move to a unified 3PP logo for 5e compatibility - including one that has been released into the public domain for that express purpose.



Still no official license, but that does not seem to be stopping folks this time.

The Auld Grump

Jon Brazer Enterprises, on the other hand, has reached the point where they . WotC is again taking too long to decide on a license, and the decision may be made to avoid the game entirely.

It was WotC taking too long dithering about the license for 4e that led to Pathfinder in the first place.

The Auld Grump

Thank you for the reply!

I will admit that I was comparing 5e six months in to 4e prerelease.

One thing that I will point out - the wording of the 4e GSL was changed a month after the date that publishers were required to remove d20 STL material from circulation. So though the license was changed to permit both OGL and GSL material in the same line and titles... publishers could not slap a sticker over the d20 icon and call it good.

It honestly felt like WotC was going out of their way to cause problems in the third party market.

I suspect that there are folks in the upper management of WotC that would really rather that there was not a license at all - and if the could have revoked the OGL then they would have. (And the good folks that created the OGL have stated for the record that is why they made the license so that WotC couldn't revoke it.)

I was thumping the drum for a license while 5e was still in its open playtest. (I think that the license should have been in place months before release - even if they had to change it at a later point. Take a look at the 'Gentleman's Agreement' for 3e.)

I honestly think that 3.X would not have been nearly as popular without third party support - that it was the breadth of material that led to the game being a success. There were people stretching the limits of the game to good effect.

Without a license for 5e... in my cold and bitter heart of hearts... I do expect 5e to die an early death - and at the same time that death is avoidable.

Locally there is little to no interest in 5e - Pathfinder continues to outsell D&D - and after the initial surge... sales have dropped to about the same numbers as 4e.

The term that I use is that WotC got greedy, then WotC got stupid. (By comparison, I look at the way Reaper handled the Bones situation - Reaper got greedy, and Reaper got smart. They needed an influx of cash to expand the Bones line, so they found a way of getting that influx of the ready.)

The best of the 3PP support for 3.X was better than the best in house products that WotC produced - from Skull & Bones to Stone to Steel.

4e never got that support, and it is looking like 5e will be stumbling in like fashion.

The Auld Grump

I suspect Hasbro management don't understand why 5e needs low revenue OEM suppliers selling compatible content into the market to be successful. After all, all their other brands work just fine with revenue earning licenses - Why should D&D be any different?

We look at 3e, the OGL and the rise of Pathfinder, and see the value the 3rd party suppliers in the RPG market. Hasbro almost certainly look at those very same things and see evidence for retaining tight control of the IP and licensing of the brand.

D&D 5e may be a good rule set, but 3e/Pathfinder/OGL has shown us that it takes a lot more than some nice rules, monster books and a couple of adventures, to make a truly great RPG. For all their ability to hire experts, WotC/Hasbro simply can't match the creative output of a passionate OEM market, and for that reason I suspect 5e may well be destined, ultimately, to do little more than provide yet more rules options in the D&D/Pathfinder market.

Jaynz where are you getting your information?

Because while 4E was sold that way (1 new rule book a month starting two months after the core rules were released) 5E has no shown no signs of that.

Core books plus 2 adventure paths and a possible players guide planned in 9 months does not sound like the same business model to me.

And WotC sure does get a lot of attention from corporate Hasbro. Just look at the third quarter earnings comments, Magic is all over those comments.

D&D however is a very small portion of Hasbro's earnings so some of your comments could apply to them.
Honestly this seems more like they are doing what Ryan Dancy talked about as non-Core brand strategy in article.
Put out the core rules, keep the brand name alive with a skeleton crew and license out what you can with the brand.
If that really the strategy, we will never see an OGL like you want Gump. It would be a license for Fans only.

Rather we would see licenses with lots of differnt publishers as this fees will be the primary way that the group makes its money.

Thanks for posting those links, ScrubKai. Those were some interesting reads.

Yeah. IMO, it is kinda disheartening to be this far into the release of 5e, and having no idea what they're planning for it. Personally, I would love to see one book per quarter - start with a generic Subgenre book (High Fantasy, Horror, Low Fantasy, Psionic, etc) talking about various optional rules you can bring into your game, some classes/subclasses that you can use with them, and how to run a game in that style, and then three sourcebooks associated with that setting - a Player's Guide with specific Player information (including classes, feats, races, subraces, and any specific nifties associated with that setting); the GMG containing an overview of the setting (including various regions/cities and the types of adventures they can have there), special rules to be used in the game (including a bit on how to run them effectively), including Magic Items, Diseases, and Poisons; and finishing out with a Monster Manual for the setting. Then, once they have their core lineup of IPs out (Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Ravenloft, Birthright, Dark Sun, Spelljammer, Planescape, Dragonlance, and Ebberon - and I'm sure I'm missing a few in there), they can focus on building up the settings that have proven popular, with region specific books that flesh out the setting and broaden the worlds.

But, it would be nice to know what they're going to do with it, one way or the other. Even just a "Generic rules expansions" vs "Setting Specific rules" would give us something to look forward to - and something we can get excited about looking forward to, rather than just speculating what may come down the line.

Yeah, looking it up, I'm a bit surprised that there's no product release schedule for the year - just a couple of small announcements for upcoming novels. My pre-order listings have nothing new for the next few months! I wasn't expecting that...