D&D General Does D&D (and RPGs in general) Need Edition Resets?

[Thomas Shey]

I find your perspective of the gaming community deeply depressing. Is it all just petty table fiefdoms ruled by tyrant DMs to you? That's the impression I've been getting.

All of it? No. Is that more common than it needs to be, in part because too many people assign more control to GMs than they need? Yes. I don't find that any more surprising than it is to any other situation where unnecessary degrees of centralized power is assigned to one person, especially when it only continues largely from tradition.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Sure, the DM can dismiss it, much like the DM can dismiss anything the players do in game that does not align with what the DM wants to happen, and yet DMs frequently accommodate the players instead of being oppressive tyrants. This is no different.

Though from the way DMs on here frequently talk, accomodations of any kind are to be avoided as much as possible.

Sure, some people like Dragonborn warlocks, but I don’t think it’s as many as half-elf wizards and human fighters.

Your choices are, shall we say, rather revealing of your bias. "Since it hasn't replace the single most popular option or the second most popular option, it can't actually be that good."

Dragonborn, as of the last official data shared from D&D Beyond where they actually showed a pie chart breakdown, were only just behind half-elves in popularity. IIRC, Warlocks were in the top 5 classes.

Your blithe dismissal of the idea that a game can improve over time seems to be rooted much more in your preference for tradition than in any frank appraisal of fact. And it ignores things like, as I have mentioned before, moving from descending to ascending AC, unified mechanics, and other mechanical developments that are quite popular.

That some things can improve or that some innovations can become part of D&D's DNA does not mean every single old thing was always bad and needing replacement. That's patently foolish. Instead, it means we need to have an open mind about the ways things have been done in the past. Do we really need to constrain ourselves to Tolkien's shadow? Dragonborn and tieflings and warlocks suggest we do not, and in fact we can benefit rather a lot from growing beyond that shadow and including more things. That is not, in any way, evidence that we should thus scorn Tolkien's legacy! Just that treating that legacy as the end-all, be-all of fantasy classes and races is unwise. Do we need to constrain ourselves to (say) five narrowly specific save categories that often get used in inscrutable ways, or to AC where massive negative values are great and your AC somehow gets more negative when you put on a +4 Elven Chain Shirt? Evidence suggests not, and that there are more effective ways of reaching the same end.

Mechanics can be designed to better fulfill the goal the designer sought in designing them. Aesthetics can grow to include more than they did before, or to give representation to something that was merely a formless desire before. Neither process has value unless we recognize that there is a space there which has value in it already. You don't renovate a home that's been condemned, you demolish and rebuild it. Renovation is only useful if the structure itself is worth preserving. And that is what things like warlocks and dragonborn are: renovations to D&D, not demolishing it.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I find your perspective of the gaming community deeply depressing. Is it all just petty table fiefdoms ruled by tyrant DMs to you? That's the impression I've been getting.

From my perspective, "all" is surely too much. But based on how folks talk about D&D on here? Absolutely it seems rampant in the community today. The DM's word is law, and if you dare to question it, be prepared to get unceremoniously kicked out at a moment's notice.

This is the promised land of "DM Empowerment."

 

[mamba]

Though from the way DMs on here frequently talk, accomodations of any kind are to be avoided as much as possible.

you will also see other DMs pushing back on those... as you probably know, there are all kinds of DMs

 

[EzekielRaiden]

you will also see other DMs pushing back on those... as you probably know, there are all kinds of DMs

I do. They are like hens' teeth. I have more than once been the only voice of criticism against such "my way or the highway" attitudes.

 

[MNblockhead]

I don't think this is true unless you think the rate of change will be rapid. Most RPGs produce supplements that add new options or alternatives to the game and then every so many years, compile the best into the latest version of the core book. Vampire the Masquerade, for example, added new clans and disciplines pulled from various sourcebooks into their main book (while making tweaks and adjustments to both) between its first, second, and third editions.

Further most companies only add errata when a new print run of the books is needed anyway, so it's not like they are recalling hundreds of Sword Coast Guides to put out the newer versions just because someone discovered that the purple dragon knight is using d8s instead of d10s.

I'm sure the ability to edit D&DB is a boon for quick changes (for example, the numerous fixes done to Spelljammer after the hadozee issue, or the change of the art in Bigby) but RPGs can still run on incremental change using the tried-and-true method of splatbooks and updates when new print runs are ordered + errata documents.

Man, I don't know. If I only had the print versions of Warhammer Fantasy it would drive me crazy annotating the margins and adding slip sheets to keep up with all the errata. Cubicle 7 just delivered a huge number of updates to (it seems) most of their published books for xmas. They release new versions of the PDFs on DrivethruRPG and you can update the modules in Foundry. It is nice that they make it easy to update, but they are not good at telling you WHAT was updated. You have to go hunting for it. They post a brief summary on their blog, but if I want to see the actual text changes, I find I have to rely on the community. If I only bought the physical books, I would find this especially annoying. Even with the digital assets, it isn't helpful to me read "the rules for Ogres have been updated." That doesn't tell me how these rules affect ogre characters already created. I don't even know if the Foundry module updates update the character sheets. The updater just says "66 items updated". Not which items and what. The Cubicle 7 "resources" section of their website only gives an errata PDF for the core rulebook.

I had to go to Reddit and the Ratcatcher's Discord server to figure out what, exactly, was changed.

DDB, in comparison, does a MUCH better job with their change log which, while focused on mechanical changes to the platform, also links to errata documentation for content changes. DDB is by no means perfect. I would like some in-line indication of changes, with the ability to view the older text. But at least I don't feel left in the dark when they do make changes.

So, while I am an enthusiastic consumer of digital tools, @Micah Sweet and others who have raised concerns about how errata are handled in digital platforms have a good point. Sticking to physical books, however, doesn't really solve anything if you want to incorporate the changes if there isn't an easily accessible log of all the changes.

 

[Mecheon]

I suspect (subjectively) that most D&D people prefer classic from AD&D era races, classes, monsters, and settings over stuff created in the 4e era and on. Sure, some people like Dragonborn warlocks, but I don’t think it’s as many as half-elf wizards and human fighters.

The most unquestionably popular D&D thing basically ever, Crticical Role, runs closer to the 4E god layout than AD&D.

also if we want to anecdote things, when I tried to get a friend into D&D and told of the 5E races, she immediately went for Tabaxi. This is because khajiit, of course. Regardless though like.... Modern tieflings alone completely eclipse anything from AD&D in fan popularity on a sheer fanart perspective which I think its telling

(also dragonborn warlocks aren't popular because they've always been statted better for pally)

 

[Micah Sweet]

Man, I don't know. If I only had the print versions of Warhammer Fantasy it would drive me crazy annotating the margins and adding slip sheets to keep up with all the errata. Cubicle 7 just delivered a huge number of updates to (it seems) most of their published books for xmas. They release new versions of the PDFs on DrivethruRPG and you can update the modules in Foundry. It is nice that they make it easy to update, but they are not good at telling you WHAT was updated. You have to go hunting for it. They post a brief summary on their blog, but if I want to see the actual text changes, I find I have to rely on the community. If I only bought the physical books, I would find this especially annoying. Even with the digital assets, it isn't helpful to me read "the rules for Ogres have been updated." That doesn't tell me how these rules affect ogre characters already created. I don't even know if the Foundry module updates update the character sheets. The updater just says "66 items updated". Not which items and what. The Cubicle 7 "resources" section of their website only gives an errata PDF for the core rulebook.

I had to go to Reddit and the Ratcatcher's Discord server to figure out what, exactly, was changed.

DDB, in comparison, does a MUCH better job with their change log which, while focused on mechanical changes to the platform, also links to errata documentation for content changes. DDB is by no means perfect. I would like some in-line indication of changes, with the ability to view the older text. But at least I don't feel left in the dark when they do make changes.

So, while I am an enthusiastic consumer of digital tools, @Micah Sweet and others who have raised concerns about how errata are handled in digital platforms have a good point. Sticking to physical books, however, doesn't really solve anything if you want to incorporate the changes if there isn't an easily accessible log of all the changes.

I make my own update document to handle this issue. Bonus that I don't have to include changes I don't like.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I make my own update document to handle this issue. Bonus that I don't have to include changes I don't like.

Though it requires your continuous effort to maintain, and your analysis of every change that comes through (meaning, you must be made aware of whatever changes occur...exactly as MNblockhead said). Not to mention, you'll have to catch folks up to speed, if you bring in anyone new or run for a group you haven't before.

There is no zero-work option here. It's just a question of who does it, how, and why.

 

[Minigiant]

The most unquestionably popular D&D thing basically ever, Crticical Role, runs closer to the 4E god layout than AD&D.

also if we want to anecdote things, when I tried to get a friend into D&D and told of the 5E races, she immediately went for Tabaxi. This is because khajiit, of course. Regardless though like.... Modern tieflings alone completely eclipse anything from AD&D in fan popularity on a sheer fanart perspective which I think its telling

(also dragonborn warlocks aren't popular because they've always been statted better for pally)

5e has many 4e elements in its core.

• Dragonborn and Tielfing as Core
• Warlock as Core
• Unified level bonus
• Cantrips
• Rituals
• Short rest
• Nonmagical healing
• Overnight full heal
• Short rest healing
• Action Points and Second Wind
• Sneak Attack works on any creature
• Hunter's Mark
• Laser clerics as core option
• Wild or Dragon Sorcerers
• Sorcerers having separate spell lists from wizards
• Paladins not just being fighty Clerics
• (soon) Martial At-Wils

Even the edition people incorrectly claim everyone hated add so much to the game. This is going to continue as new ideas that are seen as good and are not going to be ignored.

And trying to simply paste them all onto a base system not made for them just isn't going to be balanced nor workable for DMs.