Café de Nuit

Hi all,

First, at the New York Times, then, at Wizbro:

NY Times

Wizbro

Let's see if they bring the D&D brand back on track, because, frankly, the last few years have been boring,
apart, of course, of the rather entertaining RL board game.

Yours,

Rafe

Now we probably have our answer why Ravenloft 4e was cancelled...

DilisnyaRevenge wrote:Now we probably have our answer why Ravenloft 4e was cancelled...

I expect there was more than one reason, but this may have been a factor.

Of course the question on everyone's mind here: Will we see a Ravenloft 5e anytime soon?

I don't know how I feel about this... Since I've moved on to PFRPG and have not looked back... I had no interest in 4E.

I'll keep an eye out... But I really wonder if Paizo is not the new king of D&D? Reading the Wizard announcement felt like reading some stuff I read by Paizo when they were doing PF.

Patrick

Wait, so how long was the 4e cycle then?

It definitely feels shorter than 3e (although that may be skewed by the midway release of 3.5...)

I seem to recall buying my last 3e new release sometime in 2008, Exemplars of Evil. I'm surprised they're doing a new edition at this time.

Or maybe I'm losing track of time as a side effect of my increasing age...

HuManBing wrote:Wait, so how long was the 4e cycle then?

It definitely feels shorter than 3e (although that may be skewed by the midway release of 3.5...)

I seem to recall buying my last 3e new release sometime in 2008, Exemplars of Evil. I'm surprised they're doing a new edition at this time.

Or maybe I'm losing track of time as a side effect of my increasing age...

Yeah it doesn't seem like it was too long.... o.O' I do rather hope it's different than 4e.

HuManBing wrote:Wait, so how long was the 4e cycle then?

It definitely feels shorter than 3e (although that may be skewed by the midway release of 3.5...)

According to Wikipedia:
3.0 -> 2000
3.5 -> 2003
4.0 -> 2008

And I guess we can assume:
5.0 -> 2012 or 2013...?

I'm personally a fan of 4e and use it in my games extensively so I am definitely curious as to how much of a backtrack towards the 3.5 era they are going to make. My guess is that it will probably be a blend of the best of 4e with the best of 3.5 -- or at least we can hope.

Of course my biggest hurdle is that I just finally got all the wives in our gaming group to understand the rules...

To my disgrace, my first reaction was: 'Ugh, another new version? They must really want to push a new set of base rulebooks on the public.' I am not fond of 4e at all, and was extatic to be introduced to Pathfinder. And so I face the coming of 5e with some dread... I really hope it's better than 4e.

More info from Forbes here...

Interesting quotes: "To solve this problem, Wizards has been looking back at each edition of the game going back to 1974, and identifying core rules that make the game work best. [...] Mearls says the new edition is being conceived of as a modular, flexible system, easily customized to individual preferences. “Just like a player makes his character, the Dungeon Master can make his ruleset,” says Mearls. “He might say ‘I’m going to run a military campaign, it’s going to be a lot of fighting’… so he’d use the combat chapter, drop in miniatures rules, and include the martial arts optional rules.”

For me, I'll still support any worthwhile "fluff" books Wizards releases about Ravenloft, if they do a good job in updating the setting.

But this does mean they need a team that respects continuity while at the same time doing a good job in generating meaningful updates to the setting fluff. 2nd ed, DoD, and the Gazetteers were all fantastic, and still see some use today even after I migrated to different rules systems.

If 5th ed Ravenloft is basically just a rules update, then it's unlikely to be relevant to me or my gaming group. Likewise, I already own all the classic edition sourcebooks, so a simple rehash of those won't be worth my time.

I am pretty excited about the 5e announcement, but I really think WOTC isn't the right company to do another Ravenloft setting (especially given how terrible the 3e castle Ravenloft hardcover was IMO).

Open development, feedback from players....sounds like what Paizo did when they successfully launched Pathfinder. As mentioned elsewhere, once you have a PHB, DMG and a few monster books, there is little left to buy. I hate to sound like I am torpedoing the idea out of hand. The fact of the matter is this: the company that starts publishing Ravenloft will be the one getting my money. We've all gotten good at converting!

I really don't know how they will pull off what they I think they are trying to do, but if they have a Ravenloft(Gothic Horror) mod in the rules, then I can get behind a new edition. Still like 4th though and wished we could of seen the Ravenloft RPG they were working on.

I'm not really excited about it, but I do wish them well.

Rock wrote: I am not fond of 4e at all, and was extatic to be introduced to Pathfinder.

This always feels curious to me, my old gaming buddies that have Pathfinder use a blend of the rules of PFinder with 3rd edition. Since they do so... why they buy PF books? It's not like they use them or that they're that different from the 3E books they already have. Many settings of d20 I know are more different than 3.5 than Pathfinder.

What I think is that if WotC advertised and then re-published Refitted 3.5 books, like a combined PHB1&2, DMG1&2, MM1-3 with some new art, better listing of the feats and chapter layout etc, they would sell good. Again. Including selling to people that already have those books.

At some point, I think gamers are just too consumed in consuming. I can understand people that don't know 3.5 Edition buying Pathfinder books. However, I wouldn't buy those books. When I play pathfinder with my friends (and it's rare those days ), I use the SRD and I'm OK.