D&D General Ray Winninger on 5e’s success, product cadence, the OGL, and more.

[mearls]

Adding a little more texture to the new products:

WotC's budgeting starts in early September. It's a process where managers submit their plans for the following year, along with how much money they need to execute those plans. Head count is a big part of that.

The fact that we saw a wave of products announced in September, and then more products added in January, makes me suspect that in the budgeting process this happened:

• The slate of products they had already planned for '25 was not projected to hit revenue targets.
• To maintain current staffing, they had to find a way to generate more revenue.
• To do that, they added more products.

The timing adds up. I might be completely off base, but it's a process I lived through many times back in the day.

 

[mamba]

Ok... so we dont have actual facts as to whether D&D is doing horrible or great... that being the case i don't think its looking for facts that feels like a negative light... its the interpretation of said facts.

facts are neutral, whether you like them or not does not change that, and as I said WotC is not exactly forthcoming with facts that do not suit them.

An interpretation might feel negative or it might feel positive, sure. To a degree that is in the eye of the beholder though, not in the interpretation itself, even though an interpretation can certainly be biased too.

Personally I believe we need two to three years more of data to be able to say there definitely was / is a decline (or not). I am pretty sure we have seen a slowing down of growth the last two years to essentially flat. If you want to call that returning to normal after a pandemic spike, be my guest, I don’t think we can say definitely what it is yet.

In addition, the new version will ‘distort’ the underlying trend for a while, so it will take some time until we have a clear picture from the core books. The non-core would probably provide that faster, but we are unlikely to get that kind of data outside of ‘leaks’

 

[DEFCON 1]

Do you have faith, given the rules issues in the 5.5 rulebooks, that giving the team less time to make mechanics is going to lead to higher quality products?

Speaking personally... I don't see any rules issues in 5E24 that are over and above the various rules issues that were in 5E14. So if you all were able to make completely serviceable stuff back in 2014, 2015, 2016 with your smaller team... I don't see why that shouldn't happen again in 2025, 2026, 2027 with the larger one.

Especially considering there hasn't been any consensus as to what were/are the rules issues in either 5E14 or 5E24 because every table plays their game differently. So one table's bug is another table's feature.

 

[dave2008]

I’d have to look at their annual reports too, I believe overall D&D was essentially flat while BG3 income spiked, meaning that the game itself probably slowed down some. Not sure the data is sufficiently transparent to definitely say so however.

I to would have to go back and look as memory is fallable; however, that is not how I remember the report. The BG3 money was slated under digital products, not the TTRPG. IIRC, TTRG also grew, but by not as much as in the past.

So my recollection is that growth has slowed, but not stopped or retreated.

 

[Imaro]

All we can do is read the tea leaves, but seeing them go back to a product each month starting in July is not a good sign. It feels like something a team is told to do to make up for a budget shortfall. Do you have faith, given the rules issues in the 5.5 rulebooks, that giving the team less time to make mechanics is going to lead to higher quality products?

What are the rules issues in the 5.5 books... im playing with them right now and haven't hit any major issues so curious about this assertion in case im missing something?

Personally I feel like mechanics wise this will probably be one of their easier years... Mostly adventures and outside of that, looking at UA this isn't brand new stuff... its revisions of things that already exist in 5e + lore... and adventures. The rules are 5e with some revisions... Are there any mechanics heavy books slated for this year.

 

[mamba]

I think in terms of predictions, my main worry would be something like the chain that led to 4e. Here's what went down with that:

1. 3e launches in 2000 and sells incredibly well. Star Wars d20, also released that year, is also a huge sales hit.

5e is at least an order of magnitude larger than 3e or 4e were and sustained sales and even growth much longer than any other version did, so I am not sure we can use any of the prior versions as a model / predictor of where 5e is going or what triggers changes to its trajectory

When a business becomes shaky or is shrinking, there is pressure to deliver a perfect, long-term plan immediately.

I wonder about their VTT. Clearly the goal is to get subscribers, whether on DDB or the VTT. The amount of money they spend on these two dwarfs the rest of D&D, so I would expect that they will also drive what happens to D&D in the future

My biggest worry is that there's a knee jerk reaction toward moving ahead with a radically different game design. If they perceive 5e as a dead end, they'll be under huge pressure to do something completely different.

well, if the sales fell off, then they definitely would do something different, that is basically how we got every single edition since 1e.

Not sure what outside of sales falling off/ the VTT not catching on as expected would make WotC see 5e as a dead end however

 

[dave2008]

What are the rules issues in the 5.5 books... im playing with them right now and haven't hit any major issues so curious about this assertion in case im missing something?

Personally I feel like mechanics wise this will probably be one of their easier years... Mostly adventures and outside of that, looking at UA this isn't brand new stuff... its revisions of things that already exist in 5e + lore... and adventures. The rules are 5e with some revisions... Are there any mechanics heavy books slated for this year.

The only new rules we have been informed about are the circle casting rules in the FR setting book

 

[mamba]

The fact that we saw a wave of products announced in September, and then more products added in January, makes me suspect that in the budgeting process this happened:

• The slate of products they had already planned for '25 was not projected to hit revenue targets.
• To maintain current staffing, they had to find a way to generate more revenue.
• To do that, they added more products.

I would assume that the level of staffing is factored into how many products you announce / can create. So where does the work for the additional products come from? Did you overestimate how much work the originally announced product would require, are you overworking the people?

I assumed that they did not have a set release date more than that these two were created from whole cloth after someone did the math on the expected revenue.

 

[dave2008]

well, if the sales fell off, then they definitely would do something different, that is basically how we got every single edition since 1e.

Not sure what outside of sales falling off/ the VTT not catching on as expected would make WotC see 5e as a dead end however

If I was leading the D&D team I would be tracking two paths:

1. Current model: minor updates to 5e to make it as evergreen as possible
2. 6e: ground up rebuild.

If possible, you might be able to merge the two. So the speculative work you are doing on 6e could inform changes to you make to 5e. But if says fall to a point that a new edition is needed, you already have, hopefully, several years of design work on its replacement under your belt.

 

[mearls]

I can break things down in detail when I have time, but there are several areas in the 5.5 books that show the team was incredibly rushed. As a starting point, compare how the PHB explains interaction, exploration, and combat. How rules are explained in each section, and how each section uses the rules glossary, varies.

As an example, take a look at the Hiding header on page 19:

"The Dungeon Master decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. When you try to hide, you take the Hide action."

Then look at the Hide action on page 368:

"With the Hide action, you try to conceal yourself. To do so, you must succeed on a DC 15 Dexterity (Stealth) check while you're Heavily Obscured or behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover, and you must be out of any enemy's line of sight"

Those two sections contradict each other. One says the DM decides when you hide. The other gives specific conditions. Maybe the DMG clears this up. Let me pull that up and look at the Hide action's definition there.

There isn't one. So which is it? Does the DM decide, or does cover and obscurement determine if you can hide?

The point isn't to bash the rules. It's to show that this is exactly the kind of issue that arises when a team doesn't have the time needed to straighten out things like that.

The core rulebooks are the optimal environment. They had four years and were working from an existing game with a list of known issues to correct. How do follow on products work with far less time and building out wholly new stuff?