D&D 5E State of D&D

[lobo316]

More like 16 months...

And it's been 1 big adventure product per 6 months, 1 small to medium sourcebook per 6 months except the first, but that had the core rules. And 15+ short adventures per 6 months, released through the adventurer's league.

That's actually quite a lot of content. Just much of it is funneled to retailer support programs that get people to the store.

Well, I guess that would be a decent release schedule, but it just seems slower than that. Has it been 16 months? What's the "small to medium" book, the Sword Coast? I still think that's a bit anemic, but I'm willing to see how it goes. Two books a year would be ideal I think, but I would really like to see some short module support. Surely a few adventure paths running over the course of the year should be doable, no? Maybe 3x a year, release 1 part of a 3-module adventure? That's where a lot of our great memories come from, modules. The adventure league stuff I'm not really counting. It's not a bad thing, but that's not what I'm looking for.

PF has a TON of module support...and thankfully, I can covert pretty easily ;oD

 

[Grognak]

The weird thing for me, as a consumer anyway, is that they make these modules every few months that are for stores only. Why not make a series that's for home play? Not everyone wants to commit to going to a store and playing with strangers.

Modules or even connected adventures would be so much more enticing than these mega-books that contain a full campaign that could take a year to complete and which don't even contain pull-out maps. I would be 100% more interested in stuff like Out of the Abyss if it was a box set with tons of little goodies in it.

 

[darjr]

They are full of goodies. From dungeons and parts that could be pulled out as their own adventures to locations and NPCs. If you don't ever plan to run them as is they can still be immensely useful.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

<picture snipped>

Yes, exactly.

McDonald's got the idea that what their burger joint need was, in fact, to sell pizza... and it didn't actually go all that well (though a few people definitely liked it, as evident by the two locations which still serve the McPizza).

I'm glad someone went to the trouble of finding an image that explains why I chose the restaurant and food type I did for my analogy, because I know if I'd have gone with Taco Bell and sushi instead someone would have pulled either a flip-around of my analogy or the old "we don't know for sure that wouldn't work, no one has ever tried it."

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Yes, exactly.

McDonald's got the idea that what their burger joint need was, in fact, to sell pizza... and it didn't actually go all that well (though a few people definitely liked it, as evident by the two locations which still serve the McPizza).

I'm glad someone went to the trouble of finding an image that explains why I chose the restaurant and food type I did for my analogy, because I know if I'd have gone with Taco Bell and sushi instead someone would have pulled either a flip-around of my analogy or the old "we don't know for sure that wouldn't work, no one has ever tried it."

Exactly. Pizza was a huge flop for them in their test markets. I recall hearing about how the pizza boxes wouldn't fit through the drive-thru windows without turning them on their sides. Thus, the pizza slid down and clumped into the one side of the box. High-larious.

I don't want my D&D to be a messy clump on one side of the box.

 

[Tony Vargas]

No, it isn't. Look, the hardest problem that most corporations have is saying, "No." But "no" is fundamental to good design.

So, what you're saying is that the 5e 'inclusiveness' (the whole "D&D for everyone who ever loved D&D" and 'we have to roll out a new edition to support more playstyles') and DM-Empowerment mandates preclude good design, entirely.

While it is true that D&D has always been the broadest-appeal RPG, and maybe it's never even arguably been the 'best' RPG by any objective measure of design quality, I don't think I'm convinced that there's a causal link between 'broad appeal' and poor quality. That's just inverting the old appeal to popularity: an appeal to elitism.

The weird thing for me, as a consumer anyway, is that they make these modules every few months that are for stores only.

The idea is to drive traffic to the stores and make game-play visible. Obviously, increased traffic helps the stores make sales, even if they're not selling the modules (or have much else WotC-branded on the shelf - at our FLGS, for instance, there's a lot more shelf space devoted to Paizo offerigns than D&D, but a lot of the former, like flip mats & minis, are bought by people there to play D&D), because those players are likely to buy something while they're there. But, it also helps the game because people can see what the play experience is like, and some might actually be drawn in by it.

 

[Corpsetaker]

Well, to put it a different way- if you go to a restaurant, and you hate their food, why would you demand larger portions?

As it would appear that you do not like what WoTC is doing with D&D, it would seem that the one complaint you shouldn't be raising is that there isn't enough of it! I may not be well versed in my consumer math, but I am relatively certain that crud + more crud does not equal quality?

Sorry but your analogy isn't correct because I don't refer to WoTc as the restaurant. I refer WoTc as the new new cooks who decided to change the menu and D&D as the restaurant. I like D&D 5th edition just fine but I don't like WoTc and their supposed strategy. Now the difference here is the menu could potentially change at any time.

I'm not asking for more of the same thing which is what your analogy tries to say, I want more added to the menu because I don't like what's currently on it except for three things, the PHB, DMG, and MM.

Better analogy would be if Netflix decided to remove all of their movies because they feel there is too much bloat with their movie program. In order to keep it simple, they are only going to release a few movies at a time. So first up we have Die Hard, The Little Mermaid, Wedding Crashers, Marley and Me, and The Santa Clause with Tim Allen. Well out of those movies I only like Die Hard, but I'm told there are are four other movies to watch and I couldn't possibly be done watching those already.

I don't watch what I don't like.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Tony Vargas]

No. When I write something, I write it. If it is necessary to insert what you believe I have written (for example, "So, what you're saying is ..."), then that's probably not what I wrote.

You wrote: "But "no" is fundamental to good design." 5e's design is necessarily trying to say 'yes' as much as possible. You're saying 5e can't be good. You're wrong.

Look, there's a lot from OSR and 1e and all editions that don't exist in 5e.

There are a lot of mechanical details that are different, sure. But there's not a whole lot of characters you could could play in AD&D that you just can't do 5e. There's still quite a bit you could do in 3.5 or 4e that you can't in 5e, as yet. But, the system isn't closed to eventually covering them. There are also playstyles that worked with each of the prior editions that still work in 5e - and a few that could use some more support.

If 5e had included a mass of rules that supported everything, everywhere, from every edition, I wouldn't play it. And, I am guessing, there are many other that wouldn't as well.

Whenever someone draws a line in the sand and threatens to ragequit, they always like to suppose that many others will follow them.

Tolerance isn't toxic.

 

[darjr]

No, you're implying he said something he did not, then arguing those points. That doesn't make him wrong.