D&D (2024) 6E When?

[Parmandur]

When your game is in decline, then anything to boost the businsss around it is a sound business decision.



That's not a PHB2 either. I understand that subclasses are the goal NOW and for the forseeable future. But for us to get to a true 6e then 5e has to be in a significantly declined state. If 5e is in that state then they will attempt strategies to save 5e first. One strategy at that time is likely to involve more classes to drum up excitement from long time 5e fans. Bored fans tend to not buy new books of any kind afterall. I think it's only after they have pulled out all the stops of trying to save 5e that we will see a 6e.

Why would they put out a book that is proven not to drum up business (indeed, demonstrated to depress business) for the purpose of drumming up business? That's a contradiction of terms, and no business conditions will change the logical terms to make that circle square.

I doubt there will be that level of boredom any time soon, and at any rate they will do what other properties (like Monopoly) do when trying to receive interest and go for something like Star Wars D&D or Zelda D&D, rather than something illogical like a PHB2.

 

[FrogReaver]

Sure, there will eventually be something that is listed as the 6th edition of the game in the fine print, but I seriously doubt WotC will ever publish a D&D that isn't built on the basis of 5E, particularly if they follow the playtest method that you suggest they will.

Do you think a playtest 10 years from now would yield the same game as a playtest done when wotc was making D&D next?

 

[Parmandur]

Do you think a playtest 10 years from now would yield the same game as a playtest done when wotc was making D&D next?

Yes.

Essentially, I would see the differences mostly in the exceptions-based portions of the rules, not the core. Consolidating options accrued across the then-15 year history of 5E, cut some Subclasses, add a few others. But no major changes.

 

[FrogReaver]

Why would they put out a book that is proven not to drum up business (indeed, demonstrated to depress business) for the purpose of drumming up business? That's a contradiction of terms, and no business conditions will change the logical terms to make that circle square.

I don't believe that's true - but even then - it's a risk vs reward calculation. Easier to try the hail mary in the current system than start from scratch in a new system.

I doubt there will be that level of boredom any time soon, and at any rate they will do what other properties do when trying to receive interest and go for something like Star Wars D&D or Zelda D&D, rather than something illogical like a PHB2.

First of all, I agree its no time soon - which has been my point that its even further off than predicted because we don't have any indicators we could expect to see to show it's relatively close.

The problem with D&D licensing other settings is a financial one. It doesn't make a lot of sense business wise IMO. Do it when D&D is at it's peak and you potentially split the playerbase. Attempt it when it's decline and it's a much harder deal to reach - and ultimately the math has to make sense to try and save players with a licensed setting while losing money on the licensing of the setting. While it would be cool to see - I'm not sure that's a business model that makes sense to D&D - especially a D&D in decline.

 

[Shardstone]

That's not something anyone here would consider a 6e IMO.

You're right, but everyone else's idea of a 6E would probably severely damage D&D's current mainstream success.

 

[FrogReaver]

Yes.

Essentially, I would see the differences mostly in the exceptions-based portions of the rules, not the core. Consolidating options accrued across the then-15 year history of 5E, cut some Subclasses, add a few others. But no major changes.

I think peoples tastes change

 

[FrogReaver]

You're right, but everyone else's idea of a 6E would probably severely damage D&D's current mainstream success.

Which is another reason we won't see a 6e till 5e has declined to the point that the reward of making a 6e is now greater than the risk of losing whatever success of 5e that remains (which is a long way off IMO). That's another reason that I think they will attempt to save 5e in any way imaginable before going forward with a 6e.

 

[Parmandur]

I don't believe that's true - but even then - it's a risk vs reward calculation. Easier to try the hail mary in the current system than start from scratch in a new system

On what basis do you believe it's not true that the serial PHB format was a business failure?

 

[Vael]

I wonder about that. Mike Mearls has talked about getting rid of bonus actions several times. I could see 5,5e with updated classes that don't use bonus actions. The would still be compatible with 5e, just with bonus actions taken out.

He also reversed himself, saying that his main issue with bonus actions is he doesn't like how it works with dual-wielding. This is a more limited patch/errata, but even this proud nail will probably survive until a theoretical 6e.

 

[Parmandur]

I think peoples tastes change

The results of the Next playtest suggest otherwise. And the tastes may not change if the people change, and the new people have the same taste for what came before.

Any crowdsourced playtest is going to come up with an essentially conservative result, only allowing really compelling new ideas in.

I could see, for example, a shift where all Subclasses are chosen at Level 1 across the board. But nothing substantial will change if people can vote on it.