D&D 5E Light release schedule: More harm than good?

[Grainger]

We will see what happens but I will bet you that if the schedule doesn't increase then D&D will suffer.

We'll never know, though. If 5e fails, you could draw the conclusion it was because they didn't release enough books. But it might be that they released too many books, or perhaps it was a bunch of other factors.

Conversely, if they release a ton of books and then 5e does well, you could conclude this was because they released lots of books - but it might have done even better if they had released far fewer.

Time isn't going to make us any wiser about this than we are now, and even when judging whether 5e is a success, what players think might be different from what Wizards does.

 

[JoeCrow]

I love the fact that it's a "slow" release schedule.

But hang on... Slow? We've only just had the core books out, and we already have three lengthy adventures!

[snip]

5e in its core form isn't exactly a rules-light system anyway - it's just lighter than some previous editions. Rules bloat can't be conducive to drawing in new players. The sheer number of books puts me off even considering Pathfinder. That system looks like a headache to get started with, let alone play or GM, and a potentially never-ending money sinkhole as it becomes a power creep arms-race (I don't know if this is the case with Pathfinder - I'm going on my past experience of never-ending splatbooks with GW and TSR). I admit that some of Paizos adventures look good, and I like their game aids - but the sheer number of character classes is ridiculous.

Yeah, I have to agree agree with you here. I mean, I play and run Pathfinder, and I do enjoy it, but that enjoyment is distinctly tempered by the overwhelming tsunami of classes and feats and traits and spells and magic items and critters and templates and archetypes and oh my GOD there's so much stuff to factor in every time I try to put something together. It's at the point now where it becomes distinctly tempting to just say "Core Pathfinder Rulebook ONLY!" when I'm running, and then just whack 'em in the head with it if they complain. It's pretty heavy, so that's a serious threat.

As for 5e's release schedule, I'm OK with it. Yeah, a bit more news would be fun to think about, but I'm happy with the books I've got, and really the only thing that would put me over the roof right now would be an OGL announcement that made it easier to put out adventures and GM aids. And a lot of that is because I'm a writer who wants to put stuff out for a system I like, but the *wink-wink* "For The 5th Edition Of Your Favorite Game" *wink-wink* dance is kind of tiresome.

 

[Sailor Moon]

Yeah, I have to agree agree with you here. I mean, I play and run Pathfinder, and I do enjoy it, but that enjoyment is distinctly tempered by the overwhelming tsunami of classes and feats and traits and spells and magic items and critters and templates and archetypes and oh my GOD there's so much stuff to factor in every time I try to put something together. It's at the point now where it becomes distinctly tempting to just say "Core Pathfinder Rulebook ONLY!" when I'm running, and then just whack 'em in the head with it if they complain. It's pretty heavy, so that's a serious threat.

As for 5e's release schedule, I'm OK with it. Yeah, a bit more news would be fun to think about, but I'm happy with the books I've got, and really the only thing that would put me over the roof right now would be an OGL announcement that made it easier to put out adventures and GM aids. And a lot of that is because I'm a writer who wants to put stuff out for a system I like, but the *wink-wink* "For The 5th Edition Of Your Favorite Game" *wink-wink* dance is kind of tiresome.

There is no edition of any game that required you to allow everything in your home games. It's up to you to make the choice as to what you allow. That's why most books that follow the core are referred to as "optional".

These games are designed like a toolbox full of tools. You pick and choose what you use and leave the rest. A game should never limit itself because a few people can't say no.

 

[M.L. Martin]

I'm not at all invested in 5E, but I can't help but wonder if things are going to get stale if they keep on doing the "megacampaigns based on nostalgic 1E AD&D concepts and vaguely shoehorned into the Forgotten Realms" pattern that we've seen and has been hinted at so far. (Riff on DL1-14 released, T1-4 announced, EX1-2 and G1-3 hinted at.)

 

[HobbitFan]

I'm thinking the same thing Matthew.

Not only is it repetitive, it's not very imaginative or creative.

 

[Jester David]

There is no edition of any game that required you to allow everything in your home games. It's up to you to make the choice as to what you allow. That's why most books that follow the core are referred to as "optional".

These games are designed like a toolbox full of tools. You pick and choose what you use and leave the rest. A game should never limit itself because a few people can't say no.

Y'know, unless you play organized play.

The thing is, if you've bought the books, if you paid money for the content, you want to use it. Otherwise, buying the product was a waste. And that content can quickly add up if you're not careful. Even when it's only a couple books per year.
Plus, players get prickly if they buy a book and their DM doesn't want to let them use it.

But aside from that, if people are encouraged to not allow books, to only use a couple books, then what's the difference between a heavy release schedule and a light release schedule? WotC is going to move the same amount of product.

 

[Jester David]

I'm not at all invested in 5E, but I can't help but wonder if things are going to get stale if they keep on doing the "megacampaigns based on nostalgic 1E AD&D concepts and vaguely shoehorned into the Forgotten Realms" pattern that we've seen and has been hinted at so far. (Riff on DL1-14 released, T1-4 announced, EX1-2 and G1-3 hinted at.)

I doubt it's going to be all classics all the time. They're in the process of rebuilding the shattered fanbase and showing that they respect the past. They're fixing up all those bridges they burned. So they have some wiggle room for the first few adventures.
After they do some classic tales and prove themselves (and get settled into the edition and its strengths) they can get a little more experimental.

And it's not like every other edition prior didn't have some version or homage to Elemental Evil or the Giants or the Tomb of Horror, either a "Return to" or reimagining.

 

[Sailor Moon]

7

Y'know, unless you play organized play.

The thing is, if you've bought the books, if you paid money for the content, you want to use it. Otherwise, buying the product was a waste. And that content can quickly add up if you're not careful. Even when it's only a couple books per year.
Plus, players get prickly if they buy a book and their DM doesn't want to let them use it.

But aside from that, if people are encouraged to not allow books, to only use a couple books, then what's the difference between a heavy release schedule and a light release schedule? WotC is going to move the same amount of product.

Organized play restricts certain things as well.

 

[Jester David]

7
Organized play restricts certain things as well.

Content restricted by Pathfinder Society is a tiny, tiny fraction of the total content. And I don't recall any restrictions for the Adventurer's League as yet.

 

[Herr der Qual]

I for one am in favor of the "slow" release schedule, I think they are thoughtfully taking time to ensure that the material that is generated is of good quality, in the group I play in Pathfinder has released more GM banned classes/races/items/feats/rules than any other game system I've played in, and I started playing RPG's with Rifts. So that's saying something. I will say though that I have never picked up an Adventure book for any system, the closest I've come is world books for Rifts and that was for the history, location, items, classes, monsters, not the adventure.