D&D (2024) Jeremy Crawford discusses what are the 2024 Fitfh Edition Core Rulebooks.

[Parmandur]

I mean, I’m sure the game will be fine. The question is if it could have been even better had it spent that time experimenting, innovating, and iterating in bold ways instead of conservatively trying to change as little as possible at a time.

I mean, they are iterating and innovating here: but not everything tested in a lab is going ontonthe street. Nor should it.

Slow and steady makes for effective progress, long term.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I mean, I’m sure the game will be fine. The question is if it could have been even better had it spent that time experimenting, innovating, and iterating in bold ways instead of conservatively trying to change as little as possible at a time.

I'm with you, but I'm afraid that we're wrong and WotC is right (when it comes to creating a sustainably-selling, constantly growing game).

I mean, it's not IMPOSSIBLE that with crazy innovation one could create the best, most interesting, easy to learn, and potentially popular D&D EVER. (I wouldn't want change like I do if I thought it was impossible to achieve!)

BUT... they're more likely to do more harm then good if they go for drastic change, I'm afraid.

 

[Velderan]

I'm with you, but I'm afraid that we're wrong and WotC is right (when it comes to creating a sustainably-selling, constantly growing game).

I mean, it's not IMPOSSIBLE that with crazy innovation one could create the best, most interesting, easy to learn, and potentially popular D&D EVER. (I wouldn't want change like I do if I thought it was impossible to achieve!)

BUT... they're more likely to do more harm then good if they go for drastic change, I'm afraid.

Basically. They've found something that sells extremely well and has widespread adoption, so why mess with it too much? Jeremy Crawford said so.

Luckily there are plenty of other publishers making games to cater to different tastes, so people should give those a try if WotC D&D isn't doing it for them.

 

[Parmandur]

Basically. They've found something that sells extremely well and has widespread adoption, so why mess with it too much? Jeremy Crawford said so.

Luckily there are plenty of other publishers making games to cater to different tastes, so people should give those a try if WotC D&D isn't doing it for them.

Innovation is better accomplished by new games, at any rate. The Creative Commons move should prove fruitful.

 

[Charlaquin]

I'm with you, but I'm afraid that we're wrong and WotC is right (when it comes to creating a sustainably-selling, constantly growing game).

as a player and not a publisher, I have the luxury of not caring if the game sells substantially or grows constantly; on the contrary, I think the pursuit of those things only hurts the quality of the art. I’m on the side of art.

BUT... they're more likely to do more harm then good if they go for drastic change, I'm afraid.

The cool thing about being willing to change is that if a change does more harm than good, you can just… you know, change it again.

 

[Parmandur]

as a player and not a publisher, I have the luxury of not caring if the game sells substantially or grows constantly; on the contrary, I think the pursuit of those things only hurts the quality of the art. I’m on the side of art.

The cool thing about being willing to change is that if a change does more harm than good, you can just… you know, change it again.

But business failures like that hurt players and the community, too.

 

[Charlaquin]

But business failures like that hurt players and the community, too.

Failures like what? Hurt how? No game system is without flaws, but not every system is truly great. Experimentation and innovation is how greatness is achieved.

 

[DEFCON 1]

What if they find these 'fixes' not to actually be fixes to them?

Like, I wanted an upgrade for my Samsung and the one they put out exploded. Am I obligated to still by the exploding one because I complained?

Yes.

(Ask a silly question, get a silly response.)

 

[DEFCON 1]

the complaints can be valid and the changes still not worth $60 at the same time.

Then obviously their complaints weren't valid enough.

 

[Parmandur]

Failures like what? Hurt how? No game system is without flaws, but not every system is truly great. Experimentation and innovation is how greatness is achieved.

Fourth Edition nearly killed D&D as a going concern, mostly because of bold own-goals that could have been avoided. Which is what they are working to avoid by only making changes if they delight and excite the audience.