D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

[Hussar]

eh, they could survive with half the sales / the level of 4e sales, many companies do. No one strong armed them into pursuing the maximum number of sales

Who knows, maybe iterating on 4e would also have worked in the long run and gotten them over the hump

We can bandy about hypotheticals all day long. I'm talking about what actually happened. The fandom got exactly what it demanded. The fandom doesn't then get to bitch about it. If you wanted WotC to be more open to creativity, then the fandom needed to ratchet the rhetoric WAYYY back and actually let them do original stuff.

But, any time WotC tries to do anything even slightly original or innovative, the fandom slaps them down. So, again, what lesson would you take from that?

 

[mamba]

We can bandy about hypotheticals all day long. I'm talking about what actually happened. The fandom got exactly what it demanded. The fandom doesn't then get to bitch about it.

there is no ‘the fandom’ with one unified opinion so yes, people can complain

I also do not see WotC as the helpless victim here, abused by the unreasonable fandom. They want to sell their stuff, that means listing to their customers, big deal. If they knew what the customers wanted without asking, they would not have to, but 4e showed them that they had no clue about that

 

[Hussar]

there is no ‘the fandom’ with one unified opinion so yes, people can complain

I also do not see WotC as the helpless victim here, abused by the unreasonable fandom. They want to sell their stuff, that means listing to their customers, big deal. If they knew what the customers wanted without asking, they would not have to, but 4e showed them that they had no clue about that

Then, I'm somewhat at a loss here. You're now saying that it's perfectly understandable that they listen to their customers. Thus, why would it become a "design goal" issue?

I'd point out that it wasn't that they had "no clue" but rather that the fandom will become putridly toxic if they are not catered to. If WotC attempts to color outside the lines, there is a very, very vocal segment of the fandom that will poison the well to the degree that it becomes impossible to actually have any real discussion about the game. There will never be a time when those who are not being specifically catered to will not do everything in their power to poison the well.

So, the only option is to make that segment as small as possible and thus cast as wide as possible the net. Otherwise, fandom climbs up its own posterior and eats itself which serves no one.

 

[mamba]

Then, I'm somewhat at a loss here. You're now saying that it's perfectly understandable that they listen to their customers. Thus, why would it become a "design goal" issue?

I never said it is not understandable.... I am not sure what you mean by 'design goal issue', or more precisely what you consider the issue to be. All I did was say that popularity is very much a design goal of WotC, whether it was spelled out in the interview or not

2. Nowhere does he state that popularity is a design goal.

you could argue the whole point of the playtest is to gauge popularity… it clearly is an important factor, whether he says so or not

 

[Hussar]

I never said it is not understandable.... I am not sure what you mean by 'design goal issue', or more precisely what you consider the issue to be. All I did was say that popularity is very much a design goal of WotC, whether it was spelled out in the interview or not

You said a bit more than that. You made it pretty clear that popularity as a design goal comes from WotC. That it's their choice to make it a design goal. My point is that they have been given zero choice in the matter. If they don't make popularity a priority, then they are going to get crucified. The whole design goal has been forced upon them by a fandom that absolutely will not accept any deviation from the baseline.

 

[Clint_L]

I mean, what lesson would you take from the rise of Pathfinder over D&D and then, when WotC makes a version of D&D that hits all the high points of D&D they become the most successful version of D&D ever?

My takeaway is that going back to what made D&D great was an excellent design choice. That if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Look for improvements, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. And so on.

Edit: also, I disagree with holding up an edition that was blatantly trying to capitalize on World of Warcraft's popularity as an exemplar of creativity. To me, that was a blatant example of chasing popularity. 5e felt like trying to go back to what made D&D, D&D, instead of chasing a trend.

 

[FrogReaver]

You said a bit more than that. You made it pretty clear that popularity as a design goal comes from WotC. That it's their choice to make it a design goal. My point is that they have been given zero choice in the matter.

How do you figure?

If they don't make popularity a priority, then they are going to get crucified.

No. But if they deviate to far from what makes d&d feel like d&d to their fans they probably will. Its not solely about popularity for popularity’s sake, if that was the case they’d make d&d soda, cars, pizza, call of duty (or whatever computer game is popular these days).. because all that crap is more popular than d&d the rpg.

The whole design goal has been forced upon them by a fandom that absolutely will not accept any deviation from the baseline.

5e has alot of deviations from 3/3.5e.

Bounded accuracy/ advantage/ disadvantage/ subclasses/ concentration/ neo-vanician casting/ being able to move act move/ etc.

Definitely not 4e level deviations.

Thing is if 5e came right after 3/3.5e I’m not sure it would have been successful.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

True.


That's quite the non sequitur you've got going there. A truly bad game is unlikely to be successful, but unless there's a monopoly (there isn't) it has to be good for a large part of the population in order to be successful.

Yeah monopoly is popular despite being quite a bad game

 

[UngeheuerLich]

No they said at the time it outsold all previous editions

Yeah I bought too many books of that game. I could not stand it anymore in 2007. Buying a book does not mean you play it.

 

[Hussar]

My takeaway is that going back to what made D&D great was an excellent design choice. That if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Look for improvements, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. And so on.

Edit: also, I disagree with holding up an edition that was blatantly trying to capitalize on World of Warcraft's popularity as an exemplar of creativity. To me, that was a blatant example of chasing popularity. 5e felt like trying to go back to what made D&D, D&D, instead of chasing a trend.

Case and point. More than ten years later and this kind of thing rears its head the second 4e is invoked.

And people wonder why WotC does what it does. It has zero choice.

Funny how virtually all the changes that @FrogReaver brings up were 4e elements. But, since they were snuck in under the radar, no one thinks of them as 4e changes.

"Bounded accuracy/ advantage/ disadvantage/ subclasses/ concentration/ neo-vanician casting/ being able to move act move/ etc."

Bounded accuracy - 4e design principle.
Subclasses - straight from 4e. Hell, many of them are straight up NAMED for 4e subclasses.
Neo-Vancian casting - straight from 4e. Reworked AEDU?
While move-act-move was power specific, it was certainly present in 4e. And it was present in virtually every class.