D&D General Dan Rawson Named New Head Of D&D

Hasbro has announced a former Microsoft digital commerce is the new senior vice president in charge of Dungeons & Dragons. Dan Rawson was the COO of Microsoft Dynamics 365.

Hasbro also hired Cynthia Williams earlier this year; she too, came from Microsoft. Of Rawson, she said "We couldn’t be bringing on Dan at a better time. With the acquisition of D&D Beyond earlier this year, the digital capabilities and opportunities for Dungeons & Dragons are accelerating faster than ever. I am excited to partner with Dan to explore the global potential of the brand while maintaining Hasbro’s core value as a player-first company.”

Rawson himself says that "Leading D&D is the realization of a childhood dream. I’m excited to work with Cynthia once again, and I’m thrilled to work with a talented team to expand the global reach of D&D, a game I grew up with and now play with my own kids.”

Interestingly, Ray Wininger -- who has been running D&D for the last couple of years -- has removed mention of WotC and Hasbro from his Twitter bio.

 

[Imaro]

No, because its the same book, with the same information. Essentials was a new book, with new information, using the same rules.

A supplement is a new book with new information using the same rules... so again what makes Essentials a new edition?

 

[darjr]

5e and Next were synonymous in much the same way 6e and One are. I really don't see that as rude or dismissive until an official name is locked in.

Next is what WotC called it.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I won’t be sorry if Winniger is out. The last 1 1/2 years have been the poorest so far of 5e. Just lousy. Time for some new blood, though I don’t have high hopes.

Remember back in 2014-2015 when all we had were the 3 Core Rulebooks, the awful SCAG, the two terrible Tyranny of Dragons books (Hoard of the Dragon Queen and Rise of Tiamat) and Princes of the Apocalypse?

That is easily worse than any other period of time in 5e, IMO. Things started getting better after Volo's/Xanathar's came out and the quality of products has stayed more or less consistently "decent" since then.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

But not compared to 1e to 2e, or 3.0 to 3.X. to me, 6e is shaping up to be bigger than either.

We just have very different viewpoints. You grew up playing the hobby where edition changes were pretty minor (1e to 2e as the main example). I grew up in a world where most "edition changes" in D&D history were very big (2e---> 3e, 3e--->4e, 4e---->5e). What WotC and I consider "edition changes" are very different definitions from yours, because you were around when edition changes were much smaller shifts in rules.

"Edition changes" just means something different now. In modern D&D, a rule change has to be more substantial than 1e--->2e and 3e--->3.5e changes to be considered a "new edition".

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

You can already buy races, subclasses, etc. a-la carte from D&D Beyond if you don’t want the full book they’re from.

And if you do that, the amount you paid is subtracted from the price to buy the whole book if you decide to buy it later.

 

[bedir than]

What WotC and I consider "edition changes" are very different definitions from yours, because you were around when edition changes were much smaller shifts in rules.

Wizards isn't calling it an edition change, just the evolution of the current game and that all adventure books will be fully usable.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Wizards isn't calling it an edition change, just the evolution of the current game and that all adventure books will be fully usable.

That's exactly what I was saying.

 

[Smackpixi]

Remember back in 2014-2015 when all we had were the 3 Core Rulebooks, the awful SCAG, the two terrible Tyranny of Dragons books (Hoard of the Dragon Queen and Rise of Tiamat) and Princes of the Apocalypse?

That is easily worse than any other period of time in 5e, IMO. Things started getting better after Volo's/Xanathar's came out and the quality of products has stayed more or less consistently "decent" since then.

I know people like to crap on the SCAG, but it’s a pretty great and interesting book If you don’t already know everything about the Sword Coast. It may not be what DM book buyers wanted, but for what it’s advertised to be, a player facing book about the Sword Coast, it’s pretty great. Lots of places and lore to build your character around if you’re playing in the setting, plenty of leads for a DM to build a region around, and it massaged FR back to 3Eishness. So underrated. Stop being so mean to it.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I know people like to crap on the SCAG, but it’s a pretty great and interesting book If you don’t already know everything about the Sword Coast. It may not be what DM book buyers wanted, but for what it’s advertised to be, a player facing book about the Sword Coast, it’s pretty great. Lots of places and lore to build your character around if you’re playing in the setting, plenty of leads for a DM to build a region around, and it massaged FR back to 3Eishness. So underrated. Stop being so mean to it.

It's a pretty crappy campaign setting book compared to basically any of the others in 5e. There are too many deities for it to go into any amount of actual depth for the religions based around them (a problem with the FR in general, but it still makes the book worse), most of the character options are bad and unbalanced, the gazetteer section is worse than most other 5e equivalents (Eberron, Wildemount, even Storm King's Thunder), and it's too small.

It's not "underrated". It's genuinely bad, just like most other earlier 5e books. And you can't be "mean" to a book. It's an inanimate object. You could be mean/offensive to the people who designed it, but that was never my intention and calling a book poorly made isn't an attack on its authors.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

What WotC and I consider "edition changes" are very different definitions from yours, because you were around when edition changes were much smaller shifts in rules.