D&D (2024) Hypothetical Direction Shift For 1D&D/6E

[Micah Sweet]

I am not sure A5e dealt any blow.
It is good. But not strictly better.
It is different.

Eye of the beholder. A5e is strictly better than WotC D&D to me, and the gap widens with each product either company releases.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Eye of the beholder. A5e is strictly better than WotC D&D to me, and the gap widens with each product either company releases.

This is subjective. It is objectively not strictly better if you put complexity and accessability on one scale. One tends to be more left, the other more right.

Strictly better is nearly impossible for game systems. Even pathfinder does things better than DdD or LevelUp.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is subjective. It is objectively not strictly better if you put complexity and accessability on one scale. One tends to be more left, the other more right.

Strictly better is nearly impossible for game systems. Even pathfinder does things better than DdD or LevelUp.

What things? Serious question, as I'm not very familiar with PF2.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

What things? Serious question, as I'm not very familiar with PF2.

I liked the Idea of adding components of spells for better effects. I also liked the bard being able to get a spellbook.

 

[Corinnguard]

IMHO, 5e and A5e are better than PF2 with regards to the progression of their proficiency bonuses. They're consistent. PF2's proficiency bonuses are all over the place.

Let's also not forget that PF2 is called by some, Featfinder.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I could see WotC / Hasbro wanting to capture the casual D&D fan who might be inspired by the movie or upcoming TV show to try it out, but who doesn't have D&D friends who can teach them.

This would mean radically simplifying the rules and adjusting them to run even better online. The goal being that someone can be interested, do a Google Search, and start playing within 30 minutes.

 

[delericho]

Ditch printed products, and gate the whole thing behind their VTT. People can't copy their mechanics if they can't see them.

 

[Parmandur]

I also believe OneD&D was originally intended to just be a "clean up" of 5E... with a large number of player complaints over the last 8 years about wonky rules or incomplete rules or vestigial rules that could all be made more clear or more fun. A 3.5 from 3E change, rather than a 3E to 4E change. But now? I do wonder if in fact there might be a change in the wind at WotC for a larger game shift that would be considered a full "edition change"-

Putting aside the concept of the thread...I severely doubt it. I rather see making 5E CC is more about encouraging people to still make material ultimately compatible with OneD&D.

 

[Jer]

Putting aside the concept of the thread...I severely doubt it. I rather see making 5E CC is more about encouraging people to still make material ultimately compatible with OneD&D.

I don't know actually.

Ultimately I think Wizards gets more out of DM's Guild than the more open publishing model. Not only do they get a cut, they also have more control over what gets published there. (In fact in some ways the leaked info about the 1.1 OGL made me think they were trying to turn all OGL publishing into a modified version of DM's Guild). And if they open up access to DDB or their VTT it's going to be through a DM's Guild like framework instead of just an open publishing framework - if only for technical reasons because they're going to be the publishers of that material on their platforms.

In my opinion releasing the 5.1 SRD under CC was a calculated move to stop the bleeding. I suspect that someone realized that ownership of the game rules for their plans was ultimately less important than ownership of the brand and the platforms they're building. Or (and this is what I strongly suspect) there was someone making that case all along and once Wizards were pushed into a corner by leaks and bad press, that solution was the only one they had to work with.

But I will say that regardless of Wizards intent of opening up the SRD to CC licensing, it's upshot can only be to encourage people to keep making product compatible with their game. So long as they keep their vision compatible with the rules they've released into the commons, of course.

 

[Reynard]

In a vain attempt to actually get back on topic:

They could also introduce actual storytelling tools and dramatic metacurrency that would help it become the game many new players seem to want it to be -- one about dramatic action and epic stories. Part of doing this would also include killing the adventuring day (ie resource management) once and for all.