D&D General The Double-Edged Sword: Is The New D&D Edition a Cash Grab in Disguise?

[Quickleaf]

I suspect the main issue is that 5E's designer have a somewhat idiosyncratic view of what the major issues with 5E are, based on what they presented to us and how much was rejected out of hand, which doesn't give the impression that they're rushing it (whereas 4E and 5E they basically stated outright that they did), but certainly doesn't gove the impression of focused work.

I rather hope I'll be blown away by the actual product though, so of course reserve judgement.

Interesting that they seem to have dropped the idea of MM or DMG public playtests despite surprising us by saying they were doing them fairly recently. Perhaps they are still to come through?

It could be we're the idiosyncratic ones, and they're moving with the mainstream!

I recall the PAX presentation on D&D2024Next5.5 last year where they fielded a question about rules support for non-combat pillars of play (interaction & exploration), and they mentioned that they'd developed a whole exploration subsystem but found that it was too rules/procedure intense and that slowed down the game... And therefor they decided that exploration rules/procedures don't work for D&D. I'm paraphrasing.

I was flabbergasted. They almost literally said "we designed complicated exploration rules" in one breath, then in the next said "therefor exploration rules don't work." I had whiplash from the logical incongruity. Like...design it simpler maybe?

One of the issues I've had with the playtests – and I've had several – is that certain things they would kill on the cutting floor fast (or never even made it out of closed testing), while other things they iterated on and iterated on publicly.

 

[Parmandur]

I suspect the main issue is that 5E's designer have a somewhat idiosyncratic view of what the major issues with 5E are, based on what they presented to us and how much was rejected out of hand, which doesn't give the impression that they're rushing it (whereas 4E and 5E they basically stated outright that they did), but certainly doesn't gove the impression of focused work.

I rather hope I'll be blown away by the actual product though, so of course reserve judgement.

Interesting that they seem to have dropped the idea of MM or DMG public playtests despite surprising us by saying they were doing them fairly recently. Perhaps they are still to come through?

I mean, they are both pretty far out still, so they have the time to run a couple things by us yet: but I tend to doubt the major changes to those books really require fan feedback. If they are consulting UX experts, that is probsvly far better for figuring out organizational issues than UA, and that's the big thing they had to work on there.

 

[Parmandur]

One of the issues I've had with the playtests – and I've had several – is that certain things they would kill on the cutting floor fast (or never even made it out of closed testing), while other things they iterated on and iterated on publicly.

Well, sure, but that's how playtesting works..?

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I don't understand this problem. I'm still playing the old BECM game, with my old buddies from high school, over Roll20 (we live across three timezones now). We reconnected overr the pandemic and we've been logging in for games ever since, along with Bob's 14-year old daughter and John's 13-year old son.

Nobody was forced to buy anything...our old books still work just fine.

So my advice to anyone who doesn't like the newer editions of D&D: get your old books out and start sending emails. You won't be able to turn the clock back 30 years, but you'll find a group.

100%.

4e did not land with my group. No marketing or anything else forces it on us.

We played 1e until 3e came out. I suspect we will play 5e for a long time. It’s a group discussion and decision…

 

[velkymx]

Y'all deserved to be taken for every penny.

 

[grimmgoose]

I am very curious to see how effective this "not a new edition, but priced like a new edition" strategy will be. I know that some people like the idea of it being '5E, again, with tweaks', but is that worth $150+? Is the average consumer going to care? Is it going to be a Wii vs Wii U situation?

If it works now, will it work in another decade, when WOTC tries to re-tweak ideas made back in 2014?

 

[CleverNickName]

Y'all deserved to be taken for every penny.

They've been taking all of my pennies since 1986...books, dice, minis, extremely specific paintbrushes...

It's sort of how hobbies work: they're a place to put one's spare time and spending money.

 

[tetrasodium]

It could be we're the idiosyncratic ones, and they're moving with the mainstream!

I recall the PAX presentation on D&D2024Next5.5 last year where they fielded a question about rules support for non-combat pillars of play (interaction & exploration), and they mentioned that they'd developed a whole exploration subsystem but found that it was too rules/procedure intense and that slowed down the game... And therefor they decided that exploration rules/procedures don't work for D&D. I'm paraphrasing.

I was flabbergasted. They almost literally said "we designed complicated exploration rules" in one breath, then in the next said "therefor exploration rules don't work." I had whiplash from the logical incongruity. Like...design it simpler maybe?

One of the issues I've had with the playtests – and I've had several – is that certain things they would kill on the cutting floor fast (or never even made it out of closed testing), while other things they iterated on and iterated on publicly.

I think that the trouble lies in the bizarre designed for TotM priority wotc seems to hold. A lot of the time it seems like tactical and grid play are not even tested or it gets tested by a subgroup who hates everything about it. Since it's important for things like encumbrance exploration And so on to work well for those other styles there is never an effort to develop those subsystems for the needs of people who might want to use them in ways that a solid subsystem not trying to make itself irrelevant is critical and it just does this loop of self nullifying subsystems iterating towards further irrelevance. Of course wotc's own general inability to really describe and explain the gold standard TotM they intend shows the problem with that prioritization the second it crashes into blaming the gm/those players for failing to meet some indescribable ideal of an enlightened elevated being by predictably acting like a human with predictable human motivations and behaviors.

 

[Shardstone]

Y'all deserved to be taken for every penny.

WOTC TAKE THE WORLD!!!! MELT US IN YOUR FRENZIED FLAME, WIZARDS OF THE COOOOOOAST!!!!!!!!

 

[Remathilis]

Y'all deserved to be taken for every penny.

Settle down Cassandra. Not everyone agrees that new = bad. Find a group that is interested in the edition of your choice and jump off the treadmill. But don't expect the wheel to stop spinning.