WotC Jeremy Crawford Interview: Playtests from experimental to focused. By Christian Hoffer at GenCon.

[Parmandur]

It would be exceptionally cunning of Kobold Press and Cubicle 7 to include a version of the popular-but-not-popular enough WotC playtest ideas in their own versions of the 5E rules. Everyone wins that way.

Last time I looked at the Tales of the Valiant tests, they already had. They were including one early OneD&D bits that didnmake it out of experimental UAs for WotC, IIRC.

 

[mamba]

Not really, this is them following the same process they have for years.

it can be both at the same time....

 

[Parmandur]

it can be both at the same time....

Or it can be working as designed, yesting out ideas and seeing what sticks. Lukewarm, bland acquiescence to the inevitable is not the emotion designers try to elicit from users.

 

[Charlaquin]

I am not disagreeing, but I am disappointed by this.

I get that, but I think you and a few others have let your disappointment turn to bitterness. Like, even if the end result is no more than we would see in a Whoever’s Container of Everything book… Those books are still good. Just because it’s not as good as it could have been doesn’t mean it’s terrible.

Right now the improvement is so small already, and they still have plenty of time to whittle it down more. I am not sure anything worthwhile is left by the end of this.

If nothing else, weapon masteries and the origins changes are in, and I think it’s very unlikely cunning action doesn’t make it in. Plus, there’s still the monster manual and DMG material to be tested. This isn’t going to be a huge rules overhaul, which they said from the beginning was the case. But it will be some cleaning up of a system starting to show its age and a few nice new additions.

Right now I am much more interested in looking at other games than at the 2024 disgrace.

Perfectly reasonable. There’s lots of other great games out there, by all means, look to them if 5e isn’t scratching the itch for you any more.

 

[Weiley31]

It would be exceptionally cunning of Kobold Press and Cubicle 7 to include a version of the popular-but-not-popular enough WotC playtest ideas in their own versions of the 5E rules. Everyone wins that way.

From what I've seen of ToV playtest material, I think some ideas have been plucked/added in. The ToV Cleric, for example, has a similar choice deal ala the OneD&D's Cleric's Holy Order feature.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

There were some good ideas that I’m disappointed don’t seem to be making it in, and I can understand being upset about that. But the edition is not worse for the lack of change. It is, at worst, the same, which to me is still my favorite version of the game so far. And there have been some changes I think are genuine improvements, weapon masteries and cunning action being the most significant of them, along with some tweaks I’ve wanted for a long time like the Origins changes. Has WotC squandered a lot of potential in this playtest? Absolutely. Have they still managed to get a positive net result? Also yes, in my opinion. Exactly like what happened with D&D Next.

I mean, that's the problem for me, I guess.

I accepted 5E as the "apology edition", and as a pretty good edition of D&D, albeit with some significant issues and imperfections. This was an opportunity to fix pretty much all of that, and initially, it honestly looked like they were gung ho to fix pretty much all of 5E's issues.

But at this point they seem to be fixing issues and exacerbating issues in about equal measure, with absolutely no vision of what they want 2024 to be, and whilst we don't see the final product yet and indeed I think we will be surprised by what comes out in 2024, because I very much doubt it will match the "final playtest" or "final UA", my expectation is that the pluses and minuses will about equal out or the minuses will be slightly larger, not because of anything extreme or angering but because relentless blandification.

Which for me will mean I'm back to where I was in 2014 - willing to play but refusing to run D&D. Not a great place. Certainly not paying money for WotC D&D products.

Or I could be wrong and the new edition in 2024 could be a significant veer in the right direction. I just very much doubt it with Jeremy "No ideas, only surveys" Crawford in control. And of course 2024 isn't the end of the story - products from 2024 onwards could either continue to be relentlessly bland, or even make it worse, or we could suddenly see something interesting happen (again very unlikely unless new blood gets in charge of 5E).

The only thing that I could possibly see rescuing 5E apart from a surprise turn-around with the actual 2024 book content is WotC going all-in on 3PP content for Beyond. D&D is crunchy enough that I'm not interested in running (or even really playing) it without digital support, but the lack of 3PP stuff means I'm hesitant to use 3PP stuff which isn't straightforward (adventures, spells, magic items). If they can change that I might be convinced, but my guess is WotC quietly backs away from promises re an actual 3PP store by indefinitely delaying it and blaming the Beyond staff, whilst aggressively pointing towards their selected partners to claim they already did what they promised and will expand it "any day now".

Btw talking of changing minds I now largely agree with people who say 2024 isn't looking like a full new edition, it's much more like a 5.5 - more actual changes than 3.5E by far, no question about that, but their substance isn't looking to be larger. The earlier UAs certainly indicated a new edition of at least 2E magnitude but they seem to have dropped most of that.

 

[Shardstone]

Yeah but watch it get ignored and Crawford’s words get twisted into nonsense, anyway.

Oof.

Y’all really working hard at this, to be at a point where I’m defending a publicly traded corporation, which is a type of thing I don’t believe should have the legal ability to exist in any form.

Youre defending a mid designer who is making even more mid changes to the book.

Even if your interpretation is true, which I contend its not, the earlier low level changes to the game is what Crawford thinks is swinging for the bleachers. Hilarious. Now that I know what Crawford defines revolutionary to be, I have lost all hope in 5e truly improving. Even without a new edition, there is so much space to develop, and time and time again they fail to actually push the envelope. Im so bored of WotC 5e, and the community is so suspicious of 3rd party material that it never gets the attention it deserves.

Im in a bizzaro backwards world where everyone is ultra tolerant of WotCs every failing while all other ideas are interrogated under microscope. How droll. God please free me from the boredon of Crawfords narrow and simple vision

 

[Shardstone]

If I'm not mistaken... you've already said in another thread you've lost all respect for me, so I'm not exactly sure why my opinions matter to you?

Inconsistency is my modus operandi, wym

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Youre defending a mid designer who is making even more mid changes to the book.

Even if your interpretation is true, which I contend its not, the earlier low level changes to the game is what Crawford thinks is swinging for the bleachers. Hilarious. Now that I know what Crawford defines revolutionary to be, I have lost all hope in 5e truly improving. Even without a new edition, there is so much space to develop, and time and time again they fail to actually push the envelope. Im so bored of WotC 5e, and the community is so suspicious of 3rd party material that it never gets the attention it deserves.

Im in a bizzaro backwards world where everyone is ultra tolerant of WotCs every failing while all other ideas are interrogated under microscope. How droll. God please free me from the boredon of Crawfords narrow and simple vision

Yeah I was confused by the "swinging for the bleachers" comment because there hasn't been a single thing in any 5E UA since Crawford took over that could be described that way. For better or worse, he's literally "playing it safe", and nothing about the 1D&D playtest was that out there. Indeed even in Mearls' era, the only truly daring stuff was taking two solid shots at making psionics happen, completely undermined by then just giving up and going home instead of saying "Well, psionics isn't for everyone, let's go with this".

 

[Shardstone]

I get that, but I think you and a few others have let your disappointment turn to bitterness. Like, even if the end result is no more than we would see in a Whoever’s Container of Everything book… Those books are still good. Just because it’s not as good as it could have been doesn’t mean it’s terrible.

If nothing else, weapon masteries and the origins changes are in, and I think it’s very unlikely cunning action doesn’t make it in. Plus, there’s still the monster manual and DMG material to be tested. This isn’t going to be a huge rules overhaul, which they said from the beginning was the case. But it will be some cleaning up of a system starting to show its age and a few nice new additions.

Perfectly reasonable. There’s lots of other great games out there, by all means, look to them if 5e isn’t scratching the itch for you any more.

My source emotion on this is boredom. The books are boring. The mechanics are boring. The monster stats are boring. The art is boring.

Not every book. Despite popular opinion, I like Bisbys, Fizbans, and yes, even Van Richtens.

But the classes, some of the core mechanical assumptions, and most of the encounters are tired. Everything there needs a fresh dash of spice, some more interesting cinematic features, a bit more depth to the stat blocks.

Im not asking for just my taste. I loved Radiant Citadel just as I did Strahd. I enjoyed Witchlight in different but comparable ways to Tomb of Annihilation.

IM asking WotC to use a sliver of their 300 million in revenue from dnd alone to innovate and raise the bar higher. I want a better game. I want better classes. I want better adventures. Idgaf if its a product for kids, noobies, or old white men bored and tired -- quality is what WotC lacks, and audience is no excuse for mid work.