D&D 5E D&D Team Productivity?

[Parmandur]

Correct. When discussing general rules additions, those do not count.

Edit: and 1e had the Deities and Demigods, which had rules for adding gods to any campaign the DM wanted.

Deities & Demigods is a Setting book, and primarily a monster book to boot. Just as much as Ravnica or Eberron.

 

[tetrasodium]

.

I saw your criticism of the Eberron book earlier, in that you'll never run your game there. I mean, so what? The book has a ton of rules (and I consider monsters an extension of the rules) and you can use them in your own homebrew game.

I'm probably one of the most pro eberron posters on here but I could have done with more rules crunch in it as I was already doing something similar to patrons and still don't have something that supports magic item progression/churn in a wide magic world better than three attune slots, depth to weapon choice so I can support the eberron/dark sun specific weapons as more thsn yet another 1dx who cares the damage type and at the end of the day am still boxed in by the overuse of concentration/unused by design spells due to a few misleveled spells.so still need to run my eberron game very much like a fr game with specific assumptions about magic level.

Edit:I appreciate the rules added in rising but they weren't enough.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

Look at these lazy so-and-sos. Someone crack the whip and get them to start making more D&D doodads.

 

[Maxperson]

Deities & Demigods is a Setting book, and primarily a monster book to boot. Just as much as Ravnica or Eberron.

Really? What setting? Because none of those pantheons has one. And all of them can be plugged into whatever the DM wants.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

While I do think that putting out only 14-ish books in slightly-less-than-7 years is slow, I think there's a far better--and, more importantly, far more objective--measure of the minimal productivity D&D currently has.

That ol' reliable, the Jury Duty Problem.

They had one person be on it. One, singular, person out for jury duty for a few months. Because that one, singular, person was not working actively at the time, WotC was (apparently) completely unable to finish the vitally-important previous-edition-conversion-document, which would have been excellent to have early on as it would smooth the transition to the new edition. And then, when we did get that document...it was incredibly barebones. Only a few pages, highly simplistic approaches (e.g. "if you have a 4e character, multiply their level by 2/3 to get the 5e level"....as if any of us couldn't figure out that 20/30 = 2/3....)

If having ONE person out of commission puts critical projects on hold for literal months, when the final product of those projects ends up being very nearly trivial, that does not speak well of the team's productivity. It says that the rate at which they're working isn't so much a choice as it is a limit; they cannot produce more material, regardless of what they want to do.

(Of course, I'd also argue that the repeated circling around the Ranger, and specifically the Beastmaster, without ever fixing it indicates an issue with productivity as well. Despite being a well-known problem, one the designers have admitted, we go months, sometimes years between new official attempts at fixing it and they never seem to quite get the job done. Their ability to internally playtest clearly still has issues, and that implies either they're doing it badly, or they don't have enough people to do it, or both.)

 

[Umbran]

Only two that are general rule books. Specialized rules settings and modules don't count for this conversation

I don't think you get to decide that unilaterally. Remember, the thread started discussing the teams OVERALL productivity. That does not selectively exclude content, especially when some of that content, while nominally for one setting, sees fairly broad use (like SCAG).

 

[Parmandur]

Really? What setting? Because none of those pantheons has one. And all of them can be plugged into whatever the DM wants.

Not into any Setting that doesn't have Norse or Greek gods. It's just as limited in that way as the Ravnica book.

The point is, drawing arbitrary distinctions about what "counts" is obfuscation. Books with rules are rulebooks, so if Deities & Demigods "counts," so does GGtR. Rulebooks is rulebooks.

 

[tetrasodium]

While I do think that putting out only 14-ish books in slightly-less-than-7 years is slow, I think there's a far better--and, more importantly, far more objective--measure of the minimal productivity D&D currently has.

That ol' reliable, the Jury Duty Problem.

They had one person be on it. One, singular, person out for jury duty for a few months. Because that one, singular, person was not working actively at the time, WotC was (apparently) completely unable to finish the vitally-important previous-edition-conversion-document, which would have been excellent to have early on as it would smooth the transition to the new edition. And then, when we did get that document...it was incredibly barebones. Only a few pages, highly simplistic approaches (e.g. "if you have a 4e character, multiply their level by 2/3 to get the 5e level"....as if any of us couldn't figure out that 20/30 = 2/3....)

If having ONE person out of commission puts critical projects on hold for literal months, when the final product of those projects ends up being very nearly trivial, that does not speak well of the team's productivity. It says that the rate at which they're working isn't so much a choice as it is a limit; they cannot produce more material, regardless of what they want to do.

(Of course, I'd also argue that the repeated circling around the Ranger, and specifically the Beastmaster, without ever fixing it indicates an issue with productivity as well. Despite being a well-known problem, one the designers have admitted, we go months, sometimes years between new official attempts at fixing it and they never seem to quite get the job done. Their ability to internally playtest clearly still has issues, and that implies either they're doing it badly, or they don't have enough people to do it, or both.)

That's a good point, it came out since the 4e days that there was a push from cooperate for the team to create new IP that could be copywritten or something rather than focusing on other areas. It's very possible that the one true way & simplicity for the sake of simplicity in a frozen system no matter the cost & FRFRFRFRFR is just the latest command from hasbro & it will continue until 5e falters enough to consider allowing things that might have prevented people from leaving to other systems they are now invested in instead of d&d o5e

 

[Parmandur]

While I do think that putting out only 14-ish books in slightly-less-than-7 years is slow, I think there's a far better--and, more importantly, far more objective--measure of the minimal productivity D&D currently has.

That ol' reliable, the Jury Duty Problem.

They had one person be on it. One, singular, person out for jury duty for a few months. Because that one, singular, person was not working actively at the time, WotC was (apparently) completely unable to finish the vitally-important previous-edition-conversion-document, which would have been excellent to have early on as it would smooth the transition to the new edition. And then, when we did get that document...it was incredibly barebones. Only a few pages, highly simplistic approaches (e.g. "if you have a 4e character, multiply their level by 2/3 to get the 5e level"....as if any of us couldn't figure out that 20/30 = 2/3....)

If having ONE person out of commission puts critical projects on hold for literal months, when the final product of those projects ends up being very nearly trivial, that does not speak well of the team's productivity. It says that the rate at which they're working isn't so much a choice as it is a limit; they cannot produce more material, regardless of what they want to do.

(Of course, I'd also argue that the repeated circling around the Ranger, and specifically the Beastmaster, without ever fixing it indicates an issue with productivity as well. Despite being a well-known problem, one the designers have admitted, we go months, sometimes years between new official attempts at fixing it and they never seem to quite get the job done. Their ability to internally playtest clearly still has issues, and that implies either they're doing it badly, or they don't have enough people to do it, or both.)

The Ranger thing is a conscious decision, not a limitation. The Tasha's material is probably the last word on that before 6E.

The jury duty situation was like 6 years ago now, when they had a fraction of the in house team they do now, and nowhere near the bursting pipeline of available freelancers. And that document was not any sort of priority: if one team members tertiary task can wait, nobody else is going to let their own tasks fall while they cover primary and secondary tasks.

 

[darjr]

Look at these lazy so-and-sos. Someone crack the whip and get them to start making more D&D doodads.