Talk:Dungeons & Dragons 6th Edition

Trolling sense...TINGLING Fatum 23:37, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

BEHOLD: The Source: http://www.gamegrene.com/node/971

• I chortle'd. --FatGit 21:04, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

But Essentials is anything like this!

I'm stunned that the sockpuppeting troll has yet to show up.

• I'm stunned you still mad. -Zab
  • Ah, there he is!

Alright, I mad. Exquisite trolling that kept me at a sweet spot of seething fury the whole way through. 10/10, would rage again. --Dr. Thompson 16:28, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

You guys know that this is absolute shit right? Even from my OSR AD&D perspective this is absolute shit. - Anon 8/6/2014

What now?

Well, 5e is a thing now. Playtesting this spring. This page is too good just to kick out, so what now? Biggus Berrus 21:56, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, first we point and laugh at the 4rries who insisted 4e had no flaws. Heck, let's just keep with that until we get some real news on whether 5e will be like D&D, or like 4e. Sanity

Jesus Deep-Fried Christ; the editions usually live for 10 years before being replaced.

• D&D ("Gary and Dave high-five" edition) and AD&D ("Gary duzn't luv Dave" edition) -- 1979
• AD&D 2nd edition (the "Lorraine Williams wuz here" edition) -- 1989
• D&D 3rd edition (the "open licensing will never bite us on the ass" edition) -- 2000
• D&D 4th edition (the "now everyone must buy our D&D minis game" edition) -- 2008
• D&D 5th edition (the "oh god are we really this desperate" edition) -- 2013?

--NotBrandX 01:23, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

You forgot 3.5 (the "shit, we dun goofed" edition, or 'Revised 3rd Edition') -- 2003. In that sense, 3.5 lasted 10 years. --128.208.111.197 18:20, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

As far as this page is concerned, probably makes more sense to move all the content to a 6th edition article, unless 5e(real) ends up being like the article.

Making this the perpetual "next edition" article? Hm, I can dig it. Biggus Berrus 18:33, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

In all honesty, I think that they'd churn out an edition every year if they thought they could make money from it. Doesn't seem like edition quality even factors, they're with Hasbro and can produce everything faster and get it out to the masses sooner so it becomes old news in half the time. I expect, though, that 4E and 5E won't be very different, they didn't imply they're going back to old ideas (and quite frankly we know they won't) but instead would rather try new ideas, but it's the same people who made 4E in the end who are on the job. As for this article, well, considering the onset of iPads (and the fact that like all of my DMs use them) I don't expect it's too far from describing the truth. --174.106.244.48 01:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok the Joke's Over

We need to change this to a D&D 6e page and make a new Next page. --01 October 2012

For Real Now

http://www.gamegrene.com/node/971

This was the original source and its from 2009. 5th editions LAST and FINAL playtest packet came out on the 19th.

It's NOTHING like this, as these ideas predate even Merls proposition.

So um..........it should be updated and replaced with some real details soon, at least with what we've got.

Shit just got real.

Question is DO WE KEEP THIS ARTICLE, and what do we retitle it?

So the REAL real article can get the name?

• I'd say we rename this to Dungeons & Dragons 6th Edition and use this page for the real deal. Biggus Berrus (talk) 16:45, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

I never liked balance or symmetry in D&D. Was always for random.

Maybe call this page "The Future of Dungeons and Dragons" so that it's edition-neutral? --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 17:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

While 6th Edition is nice, "5th Edition" is better, since its a nod to 4th Edition. Maybe call it 4th Edition Improved or 4th Edition Revised? Or D&D New (a play on D&D Next) or smth?