WotC WotC needs an Elon Musk

[Oofta]

Being the first game out of the gate, and managing to become incredibly popular before it got any real competitors, led to D&D trying to be everything to everyone. Surprisingly it actually manages to do a pretty good job at it, if you are willing to use some optional rules and do a little tinkering.

I wonder if it would be a good idea for the new 1D&D DMG to have a set of different rules to support different playstyles. You could have a short section explaining some different playstyles for new DMs, and then have bundles of suggested optional rules to support the different playstyles.

We know they're redoing the DMG to reorganize and make it more newbie friendly. One of the things I liked in the DMG is how they described the Role of the Dice and over a couple of pages gave you different approaches and styles. I agree that they should double down on that in various areas. Cut back on things like descriptions of the umpteen zillion planes and instead tell people how to come up with their own stuff.

 

[Lanefan]

Agreed.

While there might have been a time D&D was assumed to involve risk mitigation, success though superior numbers and avoiding fights, those days have long been in the rearview of the game and it has instead been interested in high-flung action, bold decisions and resources that refresh quickly.

All of which are trends worthy of opposing at every opportunity.

It's the difference between a game where the PCs are assumed they won't directly engage their foes and one that does.

Ditto.

In short, D&D rules have morphed based on how D&D is actually PLAYED.

The rules have morphed based on how players (in general whose main interest, remember, lies in making things easier on their characters) have through endless advocacy forced them to morph; mostly because the designers haven't had the spine to push back and keep the game challenging at the design level.

 

[Lanefan]

I wonder if it would be a good idea for the new 1D&D DMG to have a set of different rules to support different playstyles.

That's what 5e was supposed to be in the first place. Remember all the promises of "modularity" during the playtest?

And yes, it's beyond a good idea - it's a great idea.

I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to happen.....

 

[codo]

That's what 5e was supposed to be in the first place. Remember all the promises of "modularity" during the playtest?

And yes, it's beyond a good idea - it's a great idea.

I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to happen.....

I know people love the idea of a fully modular D&D, as you can see I like the idea too, but can we give the "Broken Promises" line a rest. It was 1 statement, in 1 interview, before the years long public playtest had even started, by a designer who shortly after left the company over "creative differences". That is not exactly a firm "promise".

Not everything you see in a public playtest is going to end up in the game. I know it sucks when something you like doesn't make it into the game, but this kind of inflammatory rhetoric doesn't help anybody and just provokes fights.

With the new playtest starting there is already plenty to get everyone riled up about and fighting over, we don't need to constantly stir up fights from the last one.

 

[glass]

I know people love the idea of a fully modular D&D, as you can see I like the idea too, but can we give the "Broken Promises" line a rest. It was 1 statement, in 1 interview, before the years long public playtest had even started, by a designer who shortly after left the company over "creative differences".

No it wasn't. It was many statements in many articles over several months, at least some of which were pretty unequivocal.

 

[Faolyn]

I just started playing Dwarf Fortress. That game is practically targeted to me.

Have fun yet? (For a DF definition of fun, that is?)

(Now if I could get my military properly started...)

 

[Micah Sweet]

that does not mean that the majority of 5e player would like it, some people liking something is not hard we got over 8 billion we got plenty of people to like anything.

It also doesn't mean that everything, even everything in WotC D&D, has to cater to the majority.

 

[codo]

No it wasn't. It was many statements in many articles over several months, at least some of which were pretty unequivocal.

I don't want to get dragged into a fight about the last playtest, but show me any statement from a game designer say, "I promise Fifth Edition Dungeons and Dragons will be modular".

I can't find the original interview where Monte Cook firsts brings up "modularity", but here is a quote from a January 2012 interview with Mike Mearls.

There seems to be some confusion within the press and public about exactly how the new edition of the game will interact with previous editions. Do you see the next edition of D&D as entirely standalone, even though it draws inspiration from previous editions? Or is it more of a modular system, in which players can pull in elements they like directly from earlier editions?

The next iteration of D&D is a game on its own. However, what we’ll do is look at the best parts of prior editions and create either new rules or adapt existing rules to incorporate those things into the game. That’s also a big part of the open playtest, ensuring that the fans of each edition are getting what they see as the most important elements of their editions of choice.

That doesn't exactly look like a promise of total modularity to me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Being the first game out of the gate, and managing to become incredibly popular before it got any real competitors, led to D&D trying to be everything to everyone. Surprisingly it actually manages to do a pretty good job at it, if you are willing to use some optional rules and do a little tinkering.

I wonder if it would be a good idea for the new 1D&D DMG to have a set of different rules to support different playstyles. You could have a short section explaining some different playstyles for new DMs, and then have bundles of suggested optional rules to support the different playstyles.

I would be interested to see if they do that. So far, I'm not seeing anything to indicate that they even  want to support different playstyles.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Have fun yet? (For a DF definition of fun, that is?)

(Now if I could get my military properly started...)

Having a great time so far. There is nothing you can imagining doing with that premise you can't do with Dwarf Fortress.