D&D (2024) Eye Tyrant. Who Died and Made You Gygax?? Design Your Own D&D 2024X3.

[Zardnaar]

Well thank you! I consider this rather high praise.

As I said if you think your personal D&D is one true way and the new classes are apple, oranges and toast.......

 

[MGibster]

I'd end levels at 10. Hardly any players go higher than level 10 and it seems silly to balance leveling and abilities with combinations that are unlikely to happen once you pass level 10.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I'd end levels at 10. Hardly any players go higher than level 10 and it seems silly to balance leveling and abilities with combinations that are unlikely to happen once you pass level 10.

As with many other "simple, obvious" changes (like "replace ability scores with direct modifiers"), one of the problems with doing this is that even if it only affects 20% of the userbase, that 20% is part of your diehard support.

Any activity that depends on a community to function (one key way that TTRPGs do in fact resemble MMORPGs--or perhaps MMOs resemble TTRPGs?) tends to produce this kind of situation. A dense core nucleus of deeply enfranchised fans, and a large but diffuse cloud of slightly-engaged fans. Remove or weaken the nucleus, and the cloud disperses, often leading to a vicious cycle. But neglect the diffuse cloud, and the nucleus (which depends on contributions from the cloud) slowly bleeds out.

Pure-mods is almost certainly never going to be popular with enfranchised D&D fans--but the savings from switching to them is, honestly, pretty minor compared to the cost. Hence, this is one of those areas where you can easily give a sop to old-school fans with relatively minor cost. By comparison, moving back to the 1e/2e save categories ("wands", "death" etc.) would be a massive shift and almost certainly wouldn't be well-received by casual fans, even if some old-school fans would be over the moon about it.

This is, in part, what I mean by still putting like 15% of your "idea generating" budget toward old-school-leaning stuff. There's an awful lot of "tradition" in D&D that is...well. It's paper-thin already. So it's not hard to make a paper-thin rendition thereof without really paying that much of a cost in terms of clunk/cruft/bloat.

Strategic decisions on this topic, finding the places with the biggest impact to old-school fans while still making meaningful change, would be one of the most important parts of designing a book that needs to appeal to an enormous audience.

 

[Zardnaar]

As with many other "simple, obvious" changes (like "replace ability scores with direct modifiers"), one of the problems with doing this is that even if it only affects 20% of the userbase, that 20% is part of your diehard support.

Any activity that depends on a community to function (one key way that TTRPGs do in fact resemble MMORPGs--or perhaps MMOs resemble TTRPGs?) tends to produce this kind of situation. A dense core nucleus of deeply enfranchised fans, and a large but diffuse cloud of slightly-engaged fans. Remove or weaken the nucleus, and the cloud disperses, often leading to a vicious cycle. But neglect the diffuse cloud, and the nucleus (which depends on contributions from the cloud) slowly bleeds out.

Pure-mods is almost certainly never going to be popular with enfranchised D&D fans--but the savings from switching to them is, honestly, pretty minor compared to the cost. Hence, this is one of those areas where you can easily give a sop to old-school fans with relatively minor cost. By comparison, moving back to the 1e/2e save categories ("wands", "death" etc.) would be a massive shift and almost certainly wouldn't be well-received by casual fans, even if some old-school fans would be over the moon about it.

This is, in part, what I mean by still putting like 15% of your "idea generating" budget toward old-school-leaning stuff. There's an awful lot of "tradition" in D&D that is...well. It's paper-thin already. So it's not hard to make a paper-thin rendition thereof without really paying that much of a cost in terms of clunk/cruft/bloat.

Strategic decisions on this topic, finding the places with the biggest impact to old-school fans while still making meaningful change, would be one of the most important parts of designing a book that needs to appeal to an enormous audience.

WotC says 10% declining to 1%.

I may not cut the game to level 10 but woukd consider it at least.

As I said in OP not sure if 5th level spells are peak power or you would get level 9 spells at 9.

My homebrew goes to 5. I'll extend it if required but it's just more work.

That's my number 3 option though nuking D&D from orbit and rebuilding from ground up. 5E engine might survive.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

As I said if you think your personal D&D is one true way and the new classes are apple, oranges and toast.......

Well...as much as I still believe that it's morally questionable to deceive your audience, NGL, I also believe my "D&D Mojave" theory. If you made a very slightly toned down 4e (in the sense of "not quite as strident about what it's doing, but still doing most of it") and marketed it with a strong "we love you, old-school fans, we promise!" veneer, I genuinely think a lot of people would actually respond very positively. My true ideal would be less "deceive old-school fans until it's too late for them to back out", and more "integrating real OSR-like goals as much as we can...without paying more than minor cost elsewhere, while focusing on modernized design as much as we can get away with".

So, other than the relatively subversive initial component, I do actually believe something close to (but NOT identical to) my preferences would sell well....IF the presentation is picture-perfect. Because, as I've said already, perception > reality. Reality still matters...but perception matters (much) more.

 

[Zardnaar]

Well...as much as I still believe that it's morally questionable to deceive your audience, NGL, I also believe my "D&D Mojave" theory. If you made a very slightly toned down 4e (in the sense of "not quite as strident about what it's doing, but still doing most of it") and marketed it with a strong "we love you, old-school fans, we promise!" veneer, I genuinely think a lot of people would actually respond very positively. My true ideal would be less "deceive old-school fans until it's too late for them to back out", and more "integrating real OSR-like goals as much as we can...without paying more than minor cost elsewhere, while focusing on modernized design as much as we can get away with".

So, other than the relatively subversive initial component, I do actually believe something close to (but NOT identical to) my preferences would sell well....IF the presentation is picture-perfect. Because, as I've said already, perception > reality. Reality still matters...but perception matters (much) more.

Well that's what you can do here. 2/3 options commercial viability doesn't matter.

I like 5.5 mechanics the playstyle not so much.

I've been playing with newbies a lot lately. People who can't find games. Stormwrack Isle us an average adventure overall but S tier newbie one.

Hence my result may overlap with commercial viability.

I'm not sure if anything but 5E variant would work atm. Eventually people will get sick of it though. Takes me 5-10 years of heavy play I suppose before I'm ready for something else.

I flipped to 3E in 2000 after 5 years of 2E. Wasn't burnt out though. 2010 I was more or less dome with 3.X played it once after 2012 briefly.

 

[MGibster]

As with many other "simple, obvious" changes (like "replace ability scores with direct modifiers"), one of the problems with doing this is that even if it only affects 20% of the userbase, that 20% is part of your diehard support.

I think only 10% of players go past level 10. Are those 10% of my players the diehard supporters? Maybe. But this thread is about what I'd do if given control. And what I'd do is make those diehard supporters purchase a separate $50 dollar book if they wanted to go to level 20.

 

[THEMNGMNT]

I'll bite.

On the player side, I'd modify 5E to be more like Shadow of the Demon Lord. What does that mean? All subclasses would grant abilities at the same level. That opens up design space to have subclasses that work across every class, such as species-based subclasses, organizational-based subclasses, thematic subclasses. Etc. Magic would be grouped into traditions, like in SotDL. So all air spells would be in one tradition, fire spells in another, healing in another, etc. It makes magic more thematic and also curbs spellcaster power. Backgrounds would be less about delivering feats and skills, and more about narrative. If you're a sage or a guild member, that should give you power in the world. And no ability scores. I'd just use the modifiers.

On the DM side, monsters would be 4E style. I also like what Mike Mearls is doing on his Patreon regarding rests, skill challenges, exploration, etc. So something in that space. Oh, and some version of Icons from 13th Age. I want more widgets for factions, renown, bastions, etc.

On the product side, I'd put more emphasis on starter sets. I'd probably release a new starter set every year or two, and it would be explicitly tied to a new adventure path. For example, a starter set like Dragons of Stormwreck Isle would be the onramp to an adventure path like Tyranny of Dragons...and Fizban's Treasury of Dragons would come out the same year. You know, like it should have all along.

EDIT:

I also like the 4E idea of a Paragon Path/Epic Destiny. Giving players what is essentially a second subclass at about 13th level could be fun.

More broadly, I'd shift the power budget away from classes and toward subclasses, so that choice feels more distinctive and impactful.

 

[Zardnaar]

I think only 10% of players go past level 10. Are those 10% of my players the diehard supporters? Maybe. But this thread is about what I'd do if given control. And what I'd do is make those diehard supporters purchase a separate $50 dollar book if they wanted to go to level 20.

As I said no wrong answers.

I may do that not sure. Would at least consider it though.

 

[Zardnaar]

I'll bite.

On the player side, I'd modify 5E to be more like Shadow of the Demon Lord. What does that mean? All subclasses would grant abilities at the same level. That opens up design space to have subclasses that work across every class, such as species-based subclasses, organizational-based subclasses, thematic subclasses. Etc. Magic would be grouped into traditions, like in SotDL. So all air spells would be in one tradition, fire spells in another, healing in another, etc. It makes magic more thematic and also curbs spellcaster power. Oh, and no ability scores. I'd just use the modifiers. Backgrounds would be less about delivering feats and skills, and more about narrative. If you're a sage or a guild member, that should give you power in the world.

On the DM side, monsters would be 4E style. I also like what Mike Mearls is doing on his Patreon regarding rests, skill challenges, exploration, etc. So something in that space. Oh, and some version of Icons from 13th Age. I want more widgets for factions, renown, bastions, etc.

On the product side, I'd put more emphasis on starter sets. I'd probably release a new starter set every year or two, and it would be explicitly tied to a new adventure path. For example, a starter set like Dragons of Stormwreck Isle would be the onramp to an adventure path like Tyranny of Dragons...and Fizban's Treasury of Dragons would come out the same year. You know, like it should have all along.

It's good imho to provide additional information imho.

I've heard of SotDL but haven't seen it in the wild.