D&D (2024) Twelve actions for an even fresher 6th edition, or for an ultra-basic retooling of 5e

[painted_klown]

Perhaps this will be an unpopular thought ITT, but I LOVE 5E. What's wrong with the game simply continuing on as it is?

I have a feeling that if 6E were to come around and be vastly different than all previous editions, then it would cause another "splintering of players" much like 4E & Pathfinder.

5E is the first edition of D&D that I have ever played, and when compared to PF, I find the rules relatively easy to follow and understand. I am not sure that going any more basic than the current basic rules will attract a slew of new players. I think that those who do not play either want to play D&D (and they don't understand it), or they don't want to play (and they don't understand it). IMO, revamping the game into something else entirely, will not change that.

As someone who wanted to play D&D long before I ever did, I felt the #1 "barrier" (by far) was not knowing where to start & what books I needed.

With the seemingly endless slew of books available for D&D, and non-players not being aware that there are several different editions (and essentially several different games all called D&D), it becomes VERY confusing quickly when you head to a game shop without a clue...even when the desire is there.

The key to making 5E the "evergreen edition" is simply educating the general public on where to start, and then educating on what the "other books" are for. I sincerely feel that WotC have done a great thing with 5E. Making the basic rules as a free PDF that is legally available on their website was key IMO. It gives players a great place to start AND it's free. It's there to whet the appetite as well as get people gaming and interested in the brand. Once people have a true understanding of how the books "interact" with one another, and that there are indeed several versions of D&D, it's easier to get them excited to play, and (of course) purchase more books to have more options, or an adventure, or whatever they are looking to add to their game.

While I do feel that WotC have made HUGE strides in the right direction, I feel their website is a jumbled mess that is nearly useless. Even this very forum has threads dedicated to placing links to point us in the right direction to find certain things. This should never be necessary IMO. Why make it so difficult to navigate the one website that pretty much anyone would think to to go when trying to learn about D&D?

My ideas to fix it?

Make the "landing/home page" a "Welcome to d&d 5th edition" type page. On this page, begin explaining to new visitors that D&D has been through several editions in the past, and that 5E is the latest and greatest. Then explain that only 5E books and materials are needed to play. Clearly state that anything NOT 5E is essentially a different game, with different rules. State all of this with the least amount of wording necessary. Make is clear that "D&D is 5E".

The home page for the TTRPG must also be free of the other D&D branded stuff such as boardgames (can be confused for as box set), video games (I thought D&D was a PnP game?), or ANY other D&D merch that is NOT the PnP TTRPG. Do not confuse already confused consumers.

Next, there should be one link and one link only on the home page. That link could be labeled "what do I need to know". When you click on said link, it will explain what the 3 core books are, and how they relate to each other. Then explain what adventure paths/modules are, and how they relate to the 3 core books. They can also put in a plug for the starter box. On this page, you can include links to the free PDFs as well as a link for the starter box. Explain their relationships to each other, and why you may want to start with either of them.

The rest of the website should be easy to navigate for more advanced consumers, or the now educated beginner.

I'll let the "Wizards" handle it from there...LOL!

IMO, YMMV, Etc.

 

[Polyhedral_Columbia]

Perhaps this will be an unpopular thought ITT, but I LOVE 5E. What's wrong with the game simply continuing on as it is?

I admit that 5E is the most coherent version of D&D yet.

And...I would like an even more streamlined version; I think it would be good for the game.

I have a feeling that if 6E were to come around and be vastly different than all previous editions, then it would cause another "splintering of players" much like 4E & Pathfinder.

If there were a totally fresh cultural impulse, and if previous editions and settings were lovingly and clearly embraced--in the manner depicted in the OP, with free 6E conversion PDFs for (eventually) every single book from previous editions, and with a chart showing how all these editions and worlds are related (something like you suggested)--and if there were a 6E self-publishing license from the get-go, then much of the splintering tendency would be transmogrified into convergence.

Making the basic rules as a free PDF that is legally available on their website was key IMO. It gives players a great place to start AND it's free.

I would supplement this with a dirt-cheap black & white softcover version.

Why make it so difficult to navigate the one website that pretty much anyone would think to to go when trying to learn about D&D?

Frankly, this sort of obscurity is, in my view, indicative of a sort-of "corporatist" blind-spot. It's hard to explain, but there can be an ingrained institutional "culture" which unconsciously obscures basic common sense, clarity, and freshness. This systemic obscurity can even influence the website design.

My ideas to fix it?

Good ideas.

 

[Parmandur]

Slightly off-topic, but not all of the D&D board games are American style: Lords of Waterdeep is a Eurogame, by the traditional reckoning.





As to how to Eurogame D&D, qua TTRPG: that's what we are seeing from WOTC now. Honestly like how 5E is being handled much better than the "open culture" suggestions in the OP.

 

[Polyhedral_Columbia]

Slightly off-topic, but not all of the D&D board games are American style: Lords of Waterdeep is a Eurogame, by the traditional reckoning.

Good point.

5E is being handles much better than the "open culture" suggestions in the OP.

We'll see!

 

[Parmandur]

Good point.



We'll see!

Sure will!



No offense meant, interesting ideas. Just...skeptical.

 

[Big J Money]

FWIW, I don't find the "one level per session" pace appealing. I think it's just as simple to provide three options, fast pace, slow pace and one in-between. I'd be more interested in a level per 5-10 sessions (slow pace). Medium would, I guess be every 2-3. But I see what you're trying to do with the simplicity.

Just as simple would be to tie it to adventures or quests. One level per adventure/quest, etc. Then there is some sense of in-fiction relation.

 

[Polyhedral_Columbia]

Just as simple would be to tie it to adventures or quests. One level per adventure/quest, etc. Then there is some sense of in-fiction relation.

Yes you're right, that would be the nextmost quick-and-easy way of ditching XP accounting.* I didn't say it in the OP, but I was imagining that in a streamlined D&D, many adventures would only be one session long.

Thanks for chiming in.

*(I am the only one who's felt a bit embarrassed when running a D&D game with non-gamer friends, when at the end, we're tallying up XP like some bean-counting accountants? "Experience Points" are just not cool. They sound too much like "brownie points." )

 

[Polyhedral_Columbia]

To me a perfect D&D-esque boardgame would consist of:

Is this what you'd also picture as a perfect boardgame-esque TTRPG? Are you imagining this replacing the TTRPG, or do imagine it as a side-line product like the D&D Cooperative Boardgames?

I would start with basic D&D and make it even more basic.

Exactly.

 

[Hussar]

I can get on board with many of the calls in the original post, especially for core rules to be simple, robust, and setting-neutral.

Move complexity over to specific settings.

The part of D&D that I value is world-building.

It is useful to have a hub that can inform diverse settings.

The only call I object to is for forcing all players to accept all settings. You cant have a setting for a light romantic comedy while far realms is invading. It is important to keep separate settings separate.

Obviously, some players want to hop back-and-forth between Forgotten Realms and Gamma World, for example. However the decision to bridge these two settings creates a new setting that is unlike either setting alone.

Not everyone who plays Forgotten Realms wants Gamma mutants and lasers. There is no need to force players to included unwanted settings.

Let players play in a setting of their choosing.

I get that, but, there's a problem here. You're forcing those of us who don't enjoy world building to spend considerable time prepping a campaign or going out and buying a new setting book. What you are talking about is exactly how Savage Worlds works. You have a very basic game engine and then you have to build each campaign, more or less, from scratch.

I'd rather there was some of the heavy lifting already done. D&D has always come with a pretty strongly implied hodgepodge setting that's pretty easy to lift out and replace. That means that the world builders out there have a bit more work to do, since they have to strip out stuff they don't want, but, others get to sit down and play right away. That's a major strength.

 

[aramis erak]

D&D cannot make the leap to something that light and stay feeling like D&D...
but the HeroKids or some similar particularly light RPG could.