D&D (2024) Dungeons and Dragons future? Ray Winninger gives a nod to Mike Shea's proposed changes.

[Vaalingrade]

Your "half edition" shares with "completely new edition" what probably is a fatal flaw - dividing up the customer base in two camps.

So does 'releasing a new book with vibrant colors on the cover'. This is D&D fans we're talking about.

 

[Yaarel]

If including Tasha's optional class features in core is the extent of their revision, I'll be sad.

While those changes were nice, some more deep tinkering is needed in some cases. I'm thinking 4E Monks, the bland progression of Fighters and Wizards, the ''table scraps'' feel of the Sorcerer chassis, extra spells for PHB's Rangers etc

My hope is that a ''revisit'' of the PHB goes a little farther than just quality of life improvement without going full-on experimental.

I expect some tinkering with classes.

But probably with preview UA articles without too many surprises when 2024 comes out.

 

[dave2008]

Either it is perceived as compatible or it is not.

That is a different stance than your previous statement: it is the same or a new edition. The '24 books can be different, but compatible.

 

[Bill Zebub]

you can just aim now

....and give up your movement. Which has been known to be useful.

That's known in the vernacular as "a trade-off".

Also, ranged rogues are lame.

 

[Reynard]

I feel like they have told it us what it is going to be, but people still don't believe them. I guess they can be more explicit, but it is still 2 years out. I assume they want some wiggle room at this point.

"Mike Shea is going to be happy" is NOT telling us what it is. Just look at this thread.

 

[Jer]

Its undeniable, however, that a fair number of people here would like changes that are in advance (by a little or a lot) of what that model would ever be able to accomplish.

Sure that's understandable. But there's a difference between "what I want" and "what I think Wizards is going to do" or even "what I think makes the most financial sense for Wizards to do".

What I want is for them to put out a perfect game by my standards. What I think makes the most financial sense for Wizards to do is to look at the sell through on their current 5e rulebooks and see if they can sustain that sell through for as long as possible. If their sell through really is as good as everything suggests it is then they would be foolish to change the game in a major way at this point even if they do it in ways that I think make for a better game because they are far more likely to kill the golden goose that is pumping out golden eggs for them right now than they are to do anything else. The time for a major shake-up edition is when the game has fallen into the doldrums and sales are bad - you don't make major changes to a game when sales are at an all time high.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Nor should we. But why would that impact what people choose to produce, and what others choose to buy?

to me it's not... but selling something that will last and then hoping to resell it is not the way business works today... this is why people talk about planned obsolescing. the point is (or at least was before the pile on here) that WotC has more incentive to get people to buy the books... not just new people but the people who are playing today.

never in a million years would I have guess "Just selling as a growing market and not to current base isn't a great strategy" would be so controversial a statement.

If WotC finds they have a reason to edit, change and print a new set of 3 core books... and there are people out there who are happy to buy new core rule books... why wouldn't we expect that exchange of goods for money to take place?

um what??? who said anything about not expecting exchanges of goods for money?

And if there are others who choose not to buy... that's fine too. Not every book is going to be bought by every person.

correct, but my post was about how the investment in core books over years would expect core book money comeing in...

but this is an assumption on my part. WotC could be like "Hey I want this new book and I am publishing for me not you" and that is fine, it's there money and there IP

 

[tetrasodium]

I am not sure what you want to say here, but we tried to bully or DM into getting a rest in ADnD.

Difference being that it took long enough & the game was dangerous enough to pcs back then that you needed more than a closet and could easily wind up worse than you were before digging in. The 5e rules ensure that it's practically guaranteed to succeed and never result in backsliding.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

ur "half edition" shares with "completely new edition" what probably is a fatal flaw - dividing up the customer base in two camps.

yup... my number 1 fear right there... just enough change to get people mad not enough change so it makes others mad... basicly standing in the middle of the road and getting hit by cars going both ways.

I would be very surprised if WotC doesn't err on the side of caution, basically just compiling what now exists in various supplements in a new PHB.

and then again that seems to ALSO be a risk... because the players who have the 2014phb (some that bought it in last year or so) and have tasha's need a reason to buy a new book... some will buy it to collect, some to not 'have to carry both' but that one in a digital age seems less likely.

I would be very surprised if WotC did something akin to 3.5, an edition that claimed to be compatible with 3.0 but really isn't, thanks to changing a zillion little things. Trying to play in a 3.5 group with the 3.0 books was hopeless, and that's what causes customer bases to split.

that is what I have been saying

While such a strategy certainly could be successful I highly doubt WotC is inclined to give it a go now.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I see it as more of a change from 3.0 to 3.5, I think 3.5 was "backwards compatible" with 3.0, you wouldn't be too lost if you used the newer content. For the most part 3.0 played it relatively safe for mechanics and story ideas with the possible exception of the Psionics Handbook, 3.5 started to experiment more in both mechanics and story, some things landed better like the Warlock class and Expanded Psionics Handbook (which made the Psionics Handbook completely obsolete), other things flopped like Magic of Incarnum and most of the Tome of Magic.