Jeremy Crawford Also Leaving D&D Team Later This Month

Jeremy Crawford is leaving Wizards of the Coast later this month. Screen Rant (via me!) had the exclusive announcement. Crawford was the Game Director for Dungeons & Dragons and was one of the guiding forces for D&D over the past decade. In the past year, Crawford has focused on the core rulebooks and leading the team of rules designers. He has also been a face of Dungeons & Dragons for much of 5th Edition, appearing in many promotional videos and DMing Acquisitions Incorporated Actual Play series.

He joins Chris Perkins in leaving the D&D team in recent weeks. Perkins, who was the Creative Director for D&D, announced his retirement last week. Both Perkins and Crawford appear to have left Wizards on their terms, with Lanzillo very effusive with her praise of both men and their contribution in our interview.

On a personal note, I've enjoyed interviewing Jeremy over the years. He was always gracious with his time and answers and is one of the most eloquent people I've ever heard talk about D&D. I'll miss both him and Chris Perkins and look forward to their next steps, wherever that might be.

 

[popuman]

Well, that was a short reign for the House of Crawford.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

I'm not sure if this makes sense. Is D&D just a brand? You want the institutional knowledge to keep the identity, even though so much of it has been lost already.

No, I want new creatives taking a crack at it.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Lets be honest though. It wasn't 5e that made D&D popular it was Critical Role.

Most evidence disagrees with that thought though. 5e was popular immediately, before critical role came out.

However, I will agree that a lot of factors contributed to 5e’s success.

 

[kayakingpoodle]

if so, they should have left sooner

Time will tell, though I'm not a fan of much newer than Tasha's (and only about 1/2 of it) but it is hard not to view this "changing of the guard" as more of a "rats fleeing a sinking ship" seanario than a "hey we've done everything we set out to do and it's time for the next gen to build on the foundation we have left.

 

[Mournblade94]

No, I want new creatives taking a crack at it.

Where I can see the angle, we have other games where new creatives are very much manifesting. D&D is the old dog, I think we should leave it as is. And by that I mean like what Mongoose is doing with Traveller. Traveller has very much kept its identity.

 

[Zardnaar]

The core rules of 5e, even much of 5.5 (Weapon Properties and such) are not the issue with modern D&D. It's the misguided desire to keep it looking PG.

BG3, does not do this, and does not infantilize those who play it.

Yup. I wouldn't make BG3 one true way forward. I would have starter set for younger players and more mature products aimed at different crowds with suggested ages/warnings on it.

Wouldn't go as far as BG3 probably. No bear humping. Doesn't need to be infantile either across every product though.

 

[Zardnaar]

I've never read it or played it, but I had the impression that City of the Spider Queen was highly thought of.

At tge tine it was a 3/5 product.
. I've ran it 5E gets repetitive fast. It's still decent so 3/5 .

 

[Ruin Explorer]

D&D is the old dog, I think we should leave it as is.

WotC isn't a company who can or will do that, so that's pretty much just fantasy. It's fine to have that view, but it'd be totally unrealistic to expect that to actually happen with WotC in charge.

And by that I mean like what Mongoose is doing with Traveller. Traveller has very much kept its identity.

Sure, but it's a niche game that's basically appealing to a very small market and owned by a company who cares about it in large part as a game and a piece of art, not as a "PRODUCT" making "REVENUE". WotC has a lot of people at it who care about D&D a great deal, but it's a corporation which is part of a larger, even greedier and more heartless corporation (Hasbro), and to WotC's actual final decision-makers, D&D is just an IP and a PRODUCT which makes REVENUE, or fails to.

That doesn't necessarily mean D&D will change.

What it does mean is WotC will do whatever they think is going to make money. And Hasbro will probably want them to look at the shorter-term there.

That means, at some point in the next 3-6 years, we're almost certainly looking at a new edition, I'd suggest, because that's the only way WotC is going to make a big chunk of change, and there's a huge market out there of people who are willing to buy something which promises "New and improved" in a more serious way. And a "mostly the same" version like 2024 won't do that. So rather than 5E 2029 or something, we'll probably see a full on 6E (of course not called that, WotC are allergic lol).

 

[Mournblade94]

Yup. I wouldn't make BG3 one true way forward. I would have starter set for younger players and more mature products aimed at different crowds with suggested ages/warnings on it.

Wouldn't go as far as BG3 probably. No bear humping. Doesn't need to be infantile either across every product though.

I am in no way a fan of the art of 5.5, but I am struggling to see how its infantile. I think the problem is its thoroughly Mundane. Its modern people taken off the street and put into scenery instead of adventurers adventuring.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Where I can see the angle, we have other games where new creatives are very much manifesting. D&D is the old dog, I think we should leave it as is. And by that I mean like what Mongoose is doing with Traveller. Traveller has very much kept its identity.

I will just agree to disagree on that!