D&D (2024) So Will 'OneD&D' (6E) Actually Be Backwards Compatible?

[dave2008]

All I want is to not be shouted down when I engage with 5e discussions using 3pp, not treating WotC as the gold standard.

I don't know your experience, but as a community we need to face the fact that there is a lot more 3PP content out there than WotC content. I may argue with you, but I have no issue with discussing 3PP content alone with WotC content. I've never given much credence to "official" content.

 

[Mercurius]

On a more serious note, I think we've entered an era in which WotC is less interested in D&D as an RPG, and more as a brand. This has been talked about extensively, but there's a possible/probable result that I don't think is talked about much. Because of this, they want some degree of stability with the game itself - they want to sell "Dungeons & Dragons" in a wide variety of ways, and don't care as much about the actual table top game itself - as a game. So as long as people like the game, they won't change it much.

Meaning, they're no longer run by people who are interested in the evolution of the game itself, imo. They're not thinking, "How do we make D&D better?" but rather, "How do we find more ways to profit off the D&D brand?"

I'm not talking about specific game designers or even the D&D sub-group as a whole, but the decision making folks at WotC and Hasbro - and thus the "bottom line."

To me this is kind of sad. I was never an "edition purist" but always looked forward to new ways the game could be played, whether that was a new edition or an experimental supplement that turned the game a bit on its head (think later 3.5). Meaning, I liked the fact that D&D was, in the end, run by gamers - people that loved the game and wanted to explore it in different ways. But over time, "corporate creep" has gradually taken over - especially over the last five years or so.

 

[Yaarel]

I will be interested to see the upcoming Kyle Brinks interviews. I think / hope we get a more clear direction of where WotC is heading with the OGL, CC, and OneD&D from those. He has been pretty open and responsive since about the 2nd week of January.

Regarding the OGL and CC is pretty clear to me.

What will matter is the future plans for digital D&D. Everything will revolve around "virtual D&D".

The 5e table top games using the 2014 books and the SRD wont really matter anymore.

 

[dave2008]

Let me repeat - OneD&D has flipped feats to ON, so when looking at backwards compatibility we need to consider feats because we are looking at it in the combined context, not in a solely 5e context where they are a variant.

While I agree generally, one of those feats is: ASI (you know the +2 to one or +1 to 2 thing). You can simply say all feats must be ASI and your back to O5e, with the exception of the new background features they are calling 1st level feats (which are otherwise not feats IMO).

 

[dave2008]

On a more serious note, I think we've entered an era in which WotC is less interested in D&D as an RPG, and more as a brand.

We entered that era when Hasbro bought WotC.

 

[dave2008]

Regarding the OGL and CC is pretty clear to me.

What will matter is the future plans for digital D&D. Everything will revolve around "virtual D&D".

The 5e table top games using the 2014 books and the SRD wont really matter anymore.

I'm interested in if they will put more SRDs in the CC or in ORC. I would also like a bit more clarity on if a new SRD for 1D&D will be added to CC and the OGL.

 

[payn]

On a more serious note, I think we've entered an era in which WotC is less interested in D&D as an RPG, and more as a brand. This has been talked about extensively, but there's a possible/probable result that I don't think is talked about much. Because of this, they want some degree of stability with the game itself - they want to sell "Dungeons & Dragons" in a wide variety of ways, and don't care as much about the actual table top game itself - as a game. So as long as people like the game, they won't change it much.

Meaning, they're no longer run by people who are interested in the evolution of the game itself, imo. They're not thinking, "How do we make D&D better?" but rather, "How do we find more ways to profit off the D&D brand?"

I'm not talking about specific game designers or even the D&D sub-group as a whole, but the decision making folks at WotC and Hasbro - and thus the "bottom line."

To me this is kind of sad. I was never an "edition purist" but always looked forward to new ways the game could be played, whether that was a new edition or an experimental supplement that turned the game a bit on its head (think later 3.5). Meaning, I liked the fact that D&D was, in the end, run by gamers - people that loved the game and wanted to explore it in different ways. But over time, "corporate creep" has gradually taken over - especially over the last five years or so.

Thats all right, I think it will be healthy for folks to branch out and not rely on D&D to do all the heavy lifting.

 

[Yaarel]

Here is my perception.

I'm interested in

if they will put more SRDs in the CC

No, they wont.

Only something that changes the math would update the 5.1 SRD.

or in ORC.

No. But this depends on what exactly the ORC looks like.

I would also like a bit more clarity on if a new SRD for 1D&D will be added to CC and the OGL.

The OGL is dead.

Hasbro-WotC will rely on the free advertising that comes from the CC-BY 4.0.

Outside of the 5e SRD, the Hasbro-WotC lawyers will viciously enforce copyright claims.

But. Hasbro-WotC will get away with this "sues regularly" approach, because they will actually support the creativity of unofficial content that comes from the gamers inside the walled garden, in the DMsGuild (or whatever its future incarnation will be called).

 

[Scribe]

All I want is to not be shouted down when I engage with 5e discussions using 3pp, not treating WotC as the gold standard.

I dont think I've seen you shouted down over anything, its not that WotC is the gold standard (far far from it!), its that its the baseline.

 

[Mercurius]

We entered that era when Hasbro bought WotC.

That's true to an extent, but the corporate presence of Hasbro wasn't felt as much until recent years. I mean, certainly, they probably had an influence on edition changes, from 3.5 to 4E, and then the "starting afresh" of 5E. But they seemed to let the game designers design. Meaning, they didn't "George Steinbrenner" D&D. I think that changed once D&D's popularity soared five-ish years ago.