D&D 5E D&D Head Talks Future Plans (Sort Of)

WotC has launched a new design blog. The first edition is written by D&D head Ray Winninger, and he talks a little about future plans.

"Later in the year, Chris will return with our big summer adventure, James Wyatt will deliver a substantially improved version of a concept that I initiated myself, and Amanda Hamon will close us out with a project that was jointly conceived by herself and several other studio members. As usual, Jeremy Crawford is working with all of our leads, overseeing mechanical content and rules development.

In addition to these five major products, look for a couple of additional surprises we’ll unveil in the months ahead."

You can read the full blog here:

Who We Are & What We Do | D&D Studio Blog | Dungeons & Dragons

The first of many design blogs, direct from your friends at the Dungeons & Dragons Studio!

dnd.wizards.com

He also mentions that a D&D book takes 12-14 months to make, and half the projects developed don't make it to market. Winninger describes the structure of WotC's 'D&D Studio':

"The D&D Studio itself is organized into four departments: Game Design, Art, Production, and Product Management, each led by a department head. Game Design is responsible for the developing game mechanics and stories. Art establishes the “look and feel” of Dungeons & Dragons by creating visual concepts, directing our freelance illustrators, and creating innovative graphic designs. The Production department manages our project schedules, interfaces with manufacturing experts, and generally handles administrative matters for the studio. The Product Management department interfaces with sales, marketing, and market research. They also own our long-term product roadmap and look after the D&D business."

The studio has five Product Leads: Jeremy Crawford, Amanda Hamon, Chris Perkins, Wes Schneider, and James Wyatt.

 

[eyeheartawk]

My guess is we will see a second proper Monster Manual if they ever decide to start letting some of the older books go out of print and need a home for the monsters that appeared in them. So far, though, that's not happening. Even assembling all of the PDF-only WotC monsters wouldn't get you very far toward a new volume.

The nice thing about the former model was all the DM facing materials and player facing materials were separated and concentrated. Which, if you had to travel with the books was nice. With this new everything for everyone model, good luck transporting all of that.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Warlocks are one of the most popular classes.

Oh I know! That's kind of my point! It's not that the classes are bad - Bards are also v.popular in my experience, it's just that the design itself wouldn't have passed the popularity contest mechanism WotC use if presented separately as a novel class - once people get used to/warm up to a class they often go from "HMPH!" to "Okay" to "Yeah, cool!".

 

[Demetrios1453]

The Monster Manual Expanded books from DMs Guild, which has a (pricy) print on demand option, are probably your best bets in the meantime.

I hopped on that train a long time ago - I even ordered the PODs the first day they were available.

 

[Hatmatter]

You may be correct. Many strange things happen in the latter years of an edition (as seen in 1E, 2E, 3E, and even 4E - shout out to the Vampire class - a surprisingly sensible and well designed class). So I could see a Psion/Mystic/Psionicist suddenly materializing out of air molecules in a year or two. I personally think 6E is likely to land in 2024 though so I think the window is pretty small.

That said I agree with your point re: design space, and maybe they'll do it just to see if it works, and to decide if they want to even bother with Psionics in 6E.

Well, we'll see...it will be fun to observe. If I was prognosticating, I would say it will be much longer before a new edition...much, much longer. But, I left my crystal ball in a pocket dimension...so we can just sit back and see what happens.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Well, we'll see...it will be fun to observe. If I was prognosticating, I would say it will be much longer before a new edition...much, much longer. But, I left my crystal ball in a pocket dimension...so we can just sit back and see what happens.

2024 is mentioned because it's the 50th anniversary of D&D and it seems very, very unlikely that WotC would miss that opportunity to make All The Money. And the easiest way to do that is a new edition, even if it's only a lightly cleaned up 5E.

 

[Zaukrie]

2024 is mentioned because it's the 50th anniversary of D&D and it seems very, very unlikely that WotC would miss that opportunity to make All The Money. And the easiest way to do that is a new edition, even if it's only a lightly cleaned up 5E.

As a former product manager, I would 100% launch an updated/new version for the anniversary.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

2024 is mentioned because it's the 50th anniversary of D&D and it seems very, very unlikely that WotC would miss that opportunity to make All The Money. And the easiest way to do that is a new edition, even if it's only a lightly cleaned up 5E.

As a former product manager, I would 100% launch an updated/new version for the anniversary.

Releasing a new edition because it is an anniversary makes almost no sense. You already have an edition that is by far the most successful financially for your company, and has maintained double-digit growth year over year. There is essentially no reason to try and screw that up by releasing a new edition; if your current strategy is churning money, you don't change your strategy. It's a classic "if it 'aint broke, don't fix it."

I'm pretty sure that the conception of 4E, that fractured the playerbase and birthed D&D's biggest competitor Pathfinder, still puts fear into these designers of making a new edition.

That said, I suppose making "Anniversary" versions of the 3 core rulebooks with edits and some additions, but not really changing the overall design much, makes a tad bit of sense. I wouldn't really call this 5.5 though, and definitely not 6E.

 

[Zaukrie]

Releasing a new edition because it is an anniversary makes almost no sense. You already have an edition that is by far the most successful financially for your company, and has maintained double-digit growth year over year. There is essentially no reason to try and screw that up by releasing a new edition; if your current strategy is churning money, you don't change your strategy. It's a classic "if it 'aint broke, don't fix it."

I'm pretty sure that the conception of 4E, that fractured the playerbase and birthed D&D's biggest competitor Pathfinder, still puts fear into these designers of making a new edition.

That said, I suppose making "Anniversary" versions of the 3 core rulebooks with edits and some additions, but not really changing the overall design much, makes a tad bit of sense. I wouldn't really call this 5.5 though, and definitely not 6E.

"if it ain't broke, don't fix it" is how typewriter companies disappeared......But like I said, updated version is an option, which we agree on. Update "races" and classes, put in all the fixes. Adjust the monsters as they have over time. Etc......

 

[Jaeger]

We already have that for 5e, it is the Spell Point Variant in the DMG:

That's not the same really - it is still needlessly keeping the concept of "Spell Slots".

You expend a number of spell points to create a spell slot of a given level, and then use that slot to cast a spell.

An unnecessary step. And making a straightforward spell point system overly complicated.

It can be unbalanced easily, especially if you allow burning all your points on you highest level spells. Seven 1st-level spells are not equivalent to one 7th-level spell.

Of course not.

In fact to avoid confusion with legacy systems we really need to get rid of the term and concept of a "spell level". Just have the characters level be an indicator of the number of magic points that they get similar to their HP increases.

More powerful spells would cost more magic points to cast than less powerful ones, and the magic point cost would be individual to each spell. The individual 'Magic Point' cost of each spell would be determined by its utility and effect, with lots of playtesting.

The magic point cost of spells would serve as a power limiter itself. A low level wizard would not have enough magic points to even cast higher-powered spells.

This would require a complete rethink of the spell list, and a good look of how they effect the game. And probably even a bit of pruning to the list.

It would require rebuilding the magic system from the ground up. But would be quite straightforward in play.


If you really, really, really, want to restrict the power level of spells the PC's have access to at a given level, you could roughly group the spells in "tiers" of power: Tier 1 spells - PC level 1-5, Tier 2 - PC 6-10 etc.. Or something similar.

 

[Hatmatter]

Releasing a new edition because it is an anniversary makes almost no sense. You already have an edition that is by far the most successful financially for your company, and has maintained double-digit growth year over year. There is essentially no reason to try and screw that up by releasing a new edition; if your current strategy is churning money, you don't change your strategy. It's a classic "if it 'aint broke, don't fix it."

I'm pretty sure that the conception of 4E, that fractured the playerbase and birthed D&D's biggest competitor Pathfinder, still puts fear into these designers of making a new edition.

I couldn't agree more.

I think some of the ideas that others express, for example Jaeger's suggestions about getting rid of spell level, are fine but would be better as a mechanical foundation for a different game. I think it is asking too much of D&D to change every few years as tastes and trends alter among some. Every time the game changes at a foundational level, it means that Wizards is then obligated to spend years publishing again what has already been published many times (a new Forgotten Realms sourcebook, a new Ravenloft campaign setting, etc.). I would prefer Wizards deploy its resources to expand D&D into terrain where it has never gone in its fifty year history.