The key words there are, imho, "too much". It all depends on defining what too much actually is. You seem to think too much would be even one more book, where people like Harry (and me, for the matter) think otherwise. In fact I even think it's too little. What I wish for is equal options for every classes for instance. I still can not understand why some classes got more sub classes than other while there was room to do more, aside from the size of the book consideration.
D&D 5E I believe a slow and light product release can cause more harm in the long run.
The key words there are, imho, "too much". It all depends on defining what too much actually is. You seem to think too much would be even one more book, where people like Harry (and me, for the matter) think otherwise. In fact I even think it's too little. What I wish for is equal options for every classes for instance. I still can not understand why some classes got more sub classes than other while there was room to do more, aside from the size of the book consideration.
Jester David
Hero
Having lots of books puts DMs in an adversarial position where they have to tell their players "no". Even if the DM stated the limits beforehand.
Too many books scares off new players by providing too many choices. The "wall of books" phenomenon, which gets complicated with the eternal "what do I buy next?" question.
Too many books also results in reduced sales as fewer and fewer products are purchased. There's a finite amount of content that can be created and/or used in a game system. When that's reached there's pushing for a renewal and a new edition. This divides the fanbase and causes problems in the community. And making new editions is costly, requiring lots of workhours to create and test.
Demanding books at the expense of the cohesion of many people's groups, new players, and the long term health of the game is, frankly, a little selfish. It's putting personal desires for more reading and game material first. Especially when, based on the surveys, it sounds like the majority of players want fewer books.
For people who like gaming books it's also needless. There's no shortage of books for other systems or past editions to buy and absorb. There's a LOT of truly excellent games to buy with extra disposable cash. In practice, there's little difference between buying a D&D book that I'll never use and buying a Star Wars book. Or Shadows of Esteren. Or a 2e PDF.
They gave us the Elemental Evil Player's Companion. And the UA are a start. I'm satisfied with that, provided they release some revised versions after more feedback and testing.
And we don't know what's coming down the pipe. A FR campaign setting is almost certainly in the mix, and they've all but confirmed it. And they're almost certainly working on new subclasses, based on demand and vague comments on twitter. So we can expect something. There's no way they'll just have the adventure at GenCon, so we can expect a splatbook of some kind for August of this year.
It's not that they're not releasing content, it's that we don't know for sure that they're planning on releasing the content.
Why would they need to slow down? That's a slower rate of releases than any edition since the late 1970s.
It all comes down to the number one problem of WOTC, communication (and lack thereof). We are in a situation where we don't know what will happens next. We don't know if we are to look forward for said thing or not as we just don't know the release schedule, or speed of it. The fact that they don't communicate well don't help, really. Appart from a computer game and some novels there is nothing. It's difficult to consider this a bloat...
I think there is a right middle to find between the old schedule of previous edition and the way things are now to please about everybody.
I think there is a right middle to find between the old schedule of previous edition and the way things are now to please about everybody.
Harry Dresden
First Post
If I could XP you again I would.
Loss of momentum? What's moving?
The only thing that ultimately matters is *play*. Do our games keep running? Are our players entertained enough to keep coming back for more? That's the only momentum that matters.
So, I ask you (and I know I'm about to twig pride here, and for that, I apologize) - are your players going to stop coming to your table if WotC doesn't publish frequently? Your game *itself* is not engaging enough that you need WotC products to keep them coming back for more? If we are at the tables, then we'll be there to buy the next thing they do publish. If we have a habit of playing, they don't need to artificially create a habit of buying.
I kind of feel like Yoda here, but if we are concentrated on the publishing rate, rather than the content of our own games... "All his life has he looked away... to the future, to the horizon. Never his mind on where he was. Hmm? What he was doing. Hmph." Where you are, and what you are doing is running/playing a game with people. That's the focus. What do you need to do that? Everything else is content you don't really need, and therefore that WotC does not need to publish.
I will agree that WotC needs to be sure that we should have enough adventure content to keep us busy, and they haven't done a great job of that yet with 5e. They probably need to enter into some agreements to create adventures for them.
Beyond that... gravy. Icing. Not the main attraction of the meal. We'll be okay, so long as we have interesting *play*.
