D&D 5E How Many 5Es Can There Be?

[Micah Sweet]

A worthy challenge, since it's notoriously difficult to get grognards angry about something.

Yeah, we're a calm, easy-going bunch as a rule.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

13, no more.

 

[Hussar]

I would argue that the implicit idea that moving to 2024 books is an upgrade, like everybody knows that the new books will be (maybe just a little, but measurably) better is a problem.

How is that a problem?

I would hope that game developers have learned something in the ten years between about how to make the game run better. How to better present rules. How to fix outright errors.

Otherwise that means that 5e 2014 is the pinnacle of game design and presentation and cannot be improved upon. The surest road to stagnation.

 

[Micah Sweet]

How is that a problem?

I would hope that game developers have learned something in the ten years between about how to make the game run better. How to better present rules. How to fix outright errors.

Otherwise that means that 5e 2014 is the pinnacle of game design and presentation and cannot be improved upon. The surest road to stagnation.

Oh, 5e can definitely be improved upon, and has, by other companies. I don't see the 2024 books as an improvement, certainly not worth buying my books again for.

 

[mamba]

How is that a problem?

it only is a problem if the expectation does not match reality

I would hope that game developers have learned something in the ten years between about how to make the game run better. How to better present rules. How to fix outright errors.

I would hope so too, but they keep asking us whether we like things

At a minimum I see no cohesive vision, or even a desire to actually improve anything. I only see a desire to get a high approval rating, no matter what. Offer one thing and its diametrical opposite, then run with whichever was more popular, consequences be damned

Otherwise that means that 5e 2014 is the pinnacle of game design and presentation and cannot be improved upon. The surest road to stagnation.

no, it just means that WotC failed at improving it, not that it cannot be improved upon

The final jury on that is still out to me, but right now the bigger font and new art seem to be the clear improvements, everything else is more treading water to me. Some things are slightly better, some are slightly worse, which in summary makes this a huge disappointment

 

[Parmandur]

At a minimum I see no cohesive vision, or even a desire to actually improve anything. I only see a desire to get a high approval rating, no matter what. Offer one thing and its diametrical opposite, then run with whichever was more popular, consequences be damned

That's quite a cohesive vision: make a game that works for users.

 

[mamba]

That's quite a cohesive vision: make a game that works for users.

it would be if the users had one, but I am not seeing a cohesive vision reflected in what we appear to be getting, I see a back and forth with no direction on a myriad individual issues

Saying ‘we should make a popular game’ is not a vision to me, that is simply a goal

 

[Parmandur]

it would be if the users had one, but I am not seeing a cohesive vision reflected in what we appear to be getting, I see a back and forth with no direction on a myriad individual issues

Saying ‘we should make a popular game’ is not a vision to me, that is simply a goal

Making a game that makes people actually happy seems to be a high vision indeed.

 

[Reynard]

Making a game that makes people actually happy seems to be a high vision indeed.

I don't think you can actually do that with piecemeal testing, especially when the time from document to survey is so short. They should have developed a beta internally, then looked in the world for 6 months or a year if they really wanted gamers to put it through the ringer.

 

[mamba]

Making a game that makes people actually happy seems to be a high vision indeed.

yeah, we disagree on what a vision is. It takes zero vision to say ‘I want to come up something that is popular, so it sells a lot and I get rich’.

I think we had this in another thread too, I see Matt Colville having a vision and following it. I see nothing like that in the playtest. Does that mean I will like the MCDM game better? Not at all (too early to tell), but the designers follow a vision either way. WotC throws spaghetti at the wall and takes the ones that stick to it

5e has replaced ‘the vision’ with ‘the survey’, because the last time the WotC designers had a vision, they gave us 4e. Visions tend to polarize, WotC wants to be inoffensive, everyone’s vanilla.