D&D 5E Podcast on the current state of 5e

[Celtavian]

Well it's not just some of the fanbase, it's a lot of the fanbase. The evidence can be seen across the various forums.

I get what you are saying about quality products and I agree that quality over quantity is good. The problem is the AP's. The stories aren't good and I don't run AP's anyway so while these books could be trimmed in gold, I still wouldn't buy them which in turn leaves nothing for me. Books like the Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide for 3rd edition, or the old Wilderness Survival, or even the 2nd edition Tome of Magic are top quality books.

They keep feeding us these boring save the world types of AP's.

I bought a Pathfinder AP for conversion. So much fluffy story material in Pathfinder APs to play with. I still don't understand how come can rate adventures like Princes of the Apocalypse or Tyranny of Dragons on par with Pathfinder APs. WotC needs to step up their game as far as adventures go.

 

[Jester David]

Well it's not just some of the fanbase, it's a lot of the fanbase. The evidence can be seen across the various forums.

There are 171,478 active members of ENWorld. That's all of ENWorld since it's creation for every game system. The active number of posters is far, far, less. A fraction of that, maybe as low as 4 or 5%. A few hundred. Ditto the WotC boards.
D&D had an audience of millions, 500,000 that might buy the books.

Even if every single user on ENWorld united it would be a tenth of the total audience of D&D, and if everyone on the site guaranteed to buy a new splatbook it would still be less than WotC would need to sell to make an adequate profit.
But every user is NOT united. For every person that voices a desire for new book there's one that doesn't want too much new content and two or three that are silent. So even IF the ENWworld is representative of the D&D community as a whole (which it almost certainly is not) the majority of the audience doesn't have strong feelings regarding more books.

 

[Celtavian]

As someone who did not enjoy 4e, I can say I felt alienated by the decision to end an edition I liked for one I did not. And choosing to change the game to attract a new audience while expecting the existing one to just following along without checking if that's what they wanted seems like the company's fault.
It may or may not have been a majority who felt abandoned, but was a pretty sizable minority.
And I hardly think my expectations were unrealistic, especially since they managed to blow them away with 5e.

You felt this way too? It seems a lot of people forgot that WotC pretty much told us they were willing to lose us to change the game. I remember interviews with Andy Collins that made it sound like the people that didn't like 4E were just being stubborn and didn't like change.

I don't know. I don't feel that way with 5E. Mearls seems more careful than Collins and the previous staff. With Mearls I know new stuff is coming and I feel confident it will be good when it comes. Mearls seems to want to make sure he has thoroughly sifted the data before releasing product. He's truly interested in providing game material that is attractive to as wide an audience as possible by taking their feedback and converting it into mechanics.

I don't feel alienated this time around. I feel involved in the design process through the surveys and feedback. Jeremy Crawford, Mearls, and company have been very active and forthcoming answering questions on social media regarding rules and advice on the game. The articles have been consistently released with a mix of material. Some I like and use, some I don't care about. I understand it can't all be useful.

I don't know if I agree that WotC isn't communicating. They've answered more than a few of my rule questions. I feel like Mearls through podcasts like this is trying to keep the community informed of the process WotC is using to develop products. I feel like people are accustomed to the old method of near constant releases and this new process is throwing a lot of people off. Usually a game company releases material as fast as possible. That isn't the case with 5E it seems.

 

[Mistwell]

As someone who did not enjoy 4e, I can say I felt alienated by the decision to end an edition I liked for one I did not. And choosing to change the game to attract a new audience while expecting the existing one to just following along without checking if that's what they wanted seems like the company's fault.
It may or may not have been a majority who felt abandoned, but was a pretty sizable minority.
And I hardly think my expectations were unrealistic, especially since they managed to blow them away with 5e.

I am sorry you felt that way about the end of 3e. That sucks. I am sure there are 4e fans who feel that way about 5e too, and that sucks for them as well. Fortunately, I think we're seeing an attitude change this time around. It's one reason I think you taking the lack of an OGL personal is probably not well founded. But if you really do fear it that much, I'd stop doing it or find a better way to do it (like publishing through EnWorld, as someone else suggested). But, I really don't think you have to worry about it.

 

[Jester David]

I am sorry you felt that way about the end of 3e. That sucks. I am sure there are 4e fans who feel that way about 5e too, and that sucks for them as well.

Right, and that's unavoidable. No edition is going to have a 100% conversion rate, so any edition change will have some losses. But this time there was feedback from the community driving the change, so the number of disenfranchised fans should be less. By design it tried to minimize the number of people lost by the conversion and maximize returning players.

As for those fans who don't like 5e as it is... it's a shame there's not some way for people to release books modifying the game to be more to their liking...

Fortunately, I think we're seeing an attitude change this time around. It's one reason I think you taking the lack of an OGL personal is probably not well founded. But if you really do fear it that much, I'd stop doing it or find a better way to do it (like publishing through EnWorld, as someone else suggested). But, I really don't think you have to worry about it.

I don't think the response of "don't publish fan content" is adequate. Especially for an edition of the game designed around customization and house brewing. Sharing fan content on the web started incredibly early in the web's lifetime. I remember looking for netbooks back in the mid-90s.
Right now WotC seems okay with fan content. Or at least unconcerned. The current attitude by the current management seems to be to ignore this stuff. But that could change.
I'm also being somewhat safe-ish, by staying away from non-SRD terms and not formatting things as PDFs that might infringe on trade dress. But other fans might not be as careful.

Now, if WotC decides not to release a commercial OGL that sucks. But it's understandable.
But they should at least do a community use policy. Here's Paizo's. This is the fan policy that lets people do stuff with their IP provided it is free. Such as mention the Forgotten Realms or Drizzt or mention Mind Flayers in their homebrew world. There's a fan site kit currently available but it completely fails at this purpose.

 

[Yaarel]

The 5e OGL is necessary because people who create high-quality D&D products deserve the option of receiving money for their efforts.

The OGL is ideal.

Adventures are in high demand, but are less profitable than other products. Creating the OGL so other parties and persons can supply adventures is a benefit to WotC.

The 5e core books are so saturated with setting content, including an ‘everything is true’ multiverse cosmology. Any party that is trying to create a different kind of setting has no choice but to create stand alone products, whose rules refer appropriately to the new setting.

OGL is necessary.

If 5e fails to offer an OGL, indy companies will have no choice but to reuse - and reinvent the 3e OGL.

 

[Mistwell]

I don't think the response of "don't publish fan content" is adequate.

To someone who is experiencing fear, though WOTC has done nothing to solicit that fear? I do think it's adequate. WOTC doesn't owe you anything more on this. There is an existing fan policy you can use - if you are still afraid despite that existing fan policy, that's not something that's their responsibility to cure for you.

But they should at least do a community use policy.

Uh..they did. Now I think I am understanding what's happened here - you missed the news about the fan policy. Here it is, announced many months ago: https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/fan-site-kit. And yes, if you're wondering at the 4e language here and there, it's because all Mike Mearls did is slightly re-tool the 4e fan site kit. But, he's the one that tweeted it's available for 5e, and that is still the kit.

 

[Jester David]

To someone who is experiencing fear, though WOTC has done nothing to solicit that fear? I do think it's adequate. WOTC doesn't owe you anything more on this.

They've C+Ded a couple webcomics in the past. And numerous webtools and the occasional blog have been hit. And the guy making blueprints for Print on Demand minis. There is the constant worry that some lawyer might get it in their head that this stuff is costing sales or infringing on IP and start sending down takedown requests.

Does WotC owe me more? No. But if they want me to continue to support them and their efforts it would be nice. I've returned to D&D after abandoning it for other games for a number of years, and I'd like to keep supporting the game. But my support is not guaranteed. If I don't feel like WotC respects me or the fans then why support them?

There is an existing fan policy you can use - if you are still afraid despite that existing fan policy, that's not something that's their responsibility to cure for you.

Uh..they did. Now I think I am understanding what's happened here - you missed the news about the fan policy. Here it is, announced many months ago: https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/fan-site-kit. And yes, if you're wondering at the 4e language here and there, it's because all Mike Mearls did is slightly re-tool the 4e fan site kit. But, he's the one that tweeted it's available for 5e, and that is still the kit.

I'm familiar with that kit and it's terrible. It's the same kit provided for Magic the Gathering only with D&D art assets swapped in. It's not meant for content generation, it's meant as a shrine to the game. It's not a retool of the 4e fan site kit, it's a reposting of the 4e fan site kit.

I mean, just look at what the Fan Site kit expects you to do:

We encourage you to use these materials, post your character sheets for Dungeons & Dragons, create fan fiction, display your personal artwork, and just have fun on your Fan Site.​

They don't expect you to make a homebrew campaign setting, or post houserules, or manage you game, or write adventures, or post new races or classes, or anything of the things people actually do with their fan sites.

The Fan Site Kit is deeply and inherently flawed. First, it refers to the GSL for content generation. But the GSL explicitly doesn't apply to websites or forums, so it cannot be used to generate blog of website content. And the GSL only applies to 4e. (Plus all the GSL's other restrictions and prohibitions.)
Second, it doesn't include provisions for using any of WotC's other IP, such as campaign settings. The only copyrighted terms you can use are the ones included in the kit. Given the kit was last updated in January, that would mean refering to content like Princes of the Apocalypse or Out of the Abyss would be a violation of the licence causing immediate termination of said licence.
Third, it doesn't cover non-SRD content and terms like Mind Flayers or beholders. Again, referring to these causes immediate termination of the licence.
Fourth, it requires you to abide by the standards of the WotC site terms of use, agree to abide by those in exchange for using the kit. However, the Terms of Use were designed for content hosted on the WotC forums and blogs, and includes a provision that all content posted becomes the property of WotC. So if you use the Fan Site Kit you give up all copyrights to your content to WotC for free. (General Terms, Section 5. User Content.)

It is very much NOT the same thing as Paizo's community use policy, which lets you use the campaign setting of Golarion and all their IP for non-commercial fan reasons.

 

[Mistwell]

It is very much NOT the same thing as Paizo's community use policy, which lets you use the campaign setting of Golarion and all their IP for non-commercial fan reasons.

I understand it's not what you want, but it's a lot more than the nothing you claimed. If you still are afraid to post fan stuff...then why are you still posting fan stuff? I mean you say you live in fear of a cease and desist, but you're still posting it. It seems like they stance they've taken is sufficient to get people to post fan stuff, including you, who claims to be afraid to do it. I mean...who exactly is stopped from posting fan stuff if even they guy who voices a fear (based on really very little) is doing it?

 

[Uchawi]

The OGL is on top of my list on what I would like to see for 5E, but I also have a feeling that they will never go back to the "OGL" that expanded 3E. They also won't waste their time with a GSL equivalent from 4E, so in the end they will just remain silent.

I do not believe they want any competition in regards to story or selling content, because that bridges over to books, movies, toys, etc. I am guessing you will have to drink their cool aid if you want to contribute.