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.

 

[Dire Bare]

Honestly, their best stab at doing something that could’ve been innovative would’ve been Sigil, but it wasn’t technically feasible and they didn’t have the time/money/resources to commit to it. Expecting everyone to have a powerhouse PC to run it wasn’t going to get far.

We’ll see what Exodus turns out to be. Innovation doesn’t have to be a new game, it could be a new one of playing an existing one. But time will tell. Again, I stand by if you have talent leaving your company to do a new game elsewhere, then that’s a problem.

They’re maintainers of their brands: D&D and MTG. It falls right in line with what their parent company does.

Nah. Folks leave all the time, voluntarily and involuntarily, for all sorts of reasons.

Perkins and Crawford have . . . as of yet . . . not stated they plan to develop their own games or work for other game companies. They have retired. Could they, down the line, reveal new plans within the industry? Sure, but I'm going to take them at their word on the reasons they are leaving WotC.

Plenty of folks have left WotC over the past several decades to start their own games companies. Chris Pramas, Wolfgang Bauer, Monte Cook, and many others. Some were laid off, others left on their own, some felt uncomfortable with the corporate nature of WotC, others just wanted to do their own thing.

WotC definitely is maintaining the brands of D&D and Magic . . . should they not? And that does limit innovation, but does not stifle it. While you don't find their products innovative, others do . . . myself included.

Plenty of D&D 5E books have innovated and expanded upon the core D&D game. Ravnica, Theros, Radiant Citadel, Acquistions Inc, the Book of Many Things are all titles I find innovative for my D&D game. And plenty of other titles I don't necessarily find innovative, but of high quality that I'm happy to have on my shelves. D&D 5E is strongly driven by nostalgia, and I'm all there for that . . . I have really enjoyed the Ravenloft releases and even the Planescape and Spelljammer sets (with their flaws).

The Exodus TTRPG is already out . . . it's not on bookstore shelves yet or available on DDB, but the "Founder's Edition" hardcover is in my hands right now. It's almost straight D&D re-interpreted for a sci-fi setting mixing space opera and hard sci-fi tropes . . . and IMO, it works, is innovative, and going to be a lot of fun. I'm hoping that when my group is ready for a new campaign, Exodus will be available on DDB to make it easier to run, but will push it as the next game even if all I have is the hardcover.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

When talking about who would guide the road map now, I surprised D&D Executive Producer Greg Bilsland's name wasn't mentioned, it's a very EP kind of job no?

 

[TiQuinn]

They both hot recently promoted.

It’s not really clear what that promotion entailed if anything and they didn’t stick around anyways.

 

[TiQuinn]

Nah. Folks leave all the time, voluntarily and involuntarily, for all sorts of reasons.

Perkins and Crawford have . . . as of yet . . . not stated they plan to develop their own games or work for other game companies. They have retired. Could they, down the line, reveal new plans within the industry? Sure, but I'm going to take them at their word on the reasons they are leaving WotC.

Plenty of folks have left WotC over the past several decades to start their own games companies. Chris Pramas, Wolfgang Bauer, Monte Cook, and many others. Some were laid off, others left on their own, some felt uncomfortable with the corporate nature of WotC, others just wanted to do their own thing.

If this was a one off, I’d agree, but this has been a pattern going back across all the editions put out by WotC.

WotC definitely is maintaining the brands of D&D and Magic . . . should they not? And that does limit innovation, but does not stifle it. While you don't find their products innovative, others do . . . myself included.

From a business standpoint, it’s not innovative. Within an edition, there are changes but to me that’s just fiddling with the dials.

Plenty of D&D 5E books have innovated and expanded upon the core D&D game. Ravnica, Theros, Radiant Citadel, Acquistions Inc, the Book of Many Things are all titles I find innovative for my D&D game. And plenty of other titles I don't necessarily find innovative, but of high quality that I'm happy to have on my shelves. D&D 5E is strongly driven by nostalgia, and I'm all there for that . . . I have really enjoyed the Ravenloft releases and even the Planescape and Spelljammer sets (with their flaws).

I mean…they’re just more settings. I don’t see how that’s changing anything about the core of the game or the way people play it, or bringing a whole lot more people into it.

You said it: we agree to disagree. I think innovation in any business is something on a larger scale or greater impact than creating more products under an existing brand.

 

[Hussar]

That’s an iteration of the existing game. That’s not innovation.

Ok, so, basically, D&D has never innovated then by that metric.

What I'm questioning is the notion that the "lack of innovation" is caused by corporate oversight. How innovative is another issue, but, let's take a look back at history shall we?

5e (2014) rolls out. Now, this is the apologia edition. The fandom had spoken absolutely clearly. This was to be the "greatest hits" edition. Any innovation was absolutely sacrificed on the altar of nostalgia. Remember all the new mechanics that WotC floated in the run up to 2014? I do. Exploding dice for fighters? A shed load of new mechanics for every class?

And every single idea shot down in flames by the fandom. The fandom 100% rejected anything that was innovative that WotC didn't manage to slip under the radar. Was that driving by corporate interests? Not really? In 2013, Hasbro couldn't have cared less about D&D. They had, what, 6 people working in D&D. Less than a dozen. There was zero corporate oversight. And zero innovation was allowed because the fandom absolutely forbade it.

Fast forward to 5e (2024). WotC is given zero choice. 2024 MUST be backwards compatible. The fandom would absolutely lose their poop if it wasn't. So, 2024 is already hobbled for innovation by the fandom. Nothing to do with corporate interference at all. The fans spoke very loudly and very clearly. The revision rules MUST be backward compatible and must be so compatible that both sets of rules can be used concurrently at the same table. And, every single time WotC floated anything that deviated even slightly from what had come before, the fandom came down like a ton of bricks on any idea. New races? New classes? The list of mechanics that went through the wringer of the playtest is very, very long. And anything even slightly creative or innovative got crushed under the boots of the fandom.

Corporate interests hobbling innovation at WotC? Not even the slightest. You want to know why WotC stays in the middle of the road and doesn't really do a whole lot new? Look to the left and right at your game table. THAT'S the reason. And, often that's the reason that smaller companies can get away with bigger changes. It's not Hasbro that's cracking the whip. It's the fans. Someone doesn't like one of the new Kobold books? Ok, fine, they maybe criticize it a bit at the time and then forget about it. Someone doesn't like Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft? They're going to bring it up EVERY SINGLE CHANCE THEY GET, over and over and over and over and over again, in order to scream from the rooftops how bad WotC is and how it's Hasbro and WotC that's ruining D&D.

And it never, ever lets up. It never, ever stops.

 

[Hussar]

I mean…they’re just more settings. I don’t see how that’s changing anything about the core of the game or the way people play it, or bringing a whole lot more people into it.

Hang on. What? Bringing more people into it? Good grief, how much growth do you actually expect? We've seen the hobby freaking EXPLODE over the past ten years. With no sign that it's shrinking.

Put it another way. How many gamers do you think Level Up has brought to D&D compared to the 2024 PHB? WotC has brought more people to the hobby than probably all other games combined. By a very, very large margin.

And it continues to do so. When you see statistics like the numbers of different games being run on VTT's and 5e straight up outnumbers all other games combined, what exactly do you think that means? What, there are millions of non-D&D RPG gamers that apparently don't buy books (since no non-WotC publisher is even remotely in the same league as WotC), apparently are invisible on forums and various other social media and only exist in some sort of nebulous quantum state where they vanish if they are observed?

I mean come on. Be serious here.

 

[TiQuinn]

Ok, so, basically, D&D has never innovated then by that metric.

D&D is not the same thing as WotC. Two separate things with two different standards and scales for measuring innovation. The game can improve but that’s not the same as innovation at the company level. You said WotC was an innovator and I’m saying no, they haven’t been in a long time - not that they never have been.

What I'm questioning is the notion that the "lack of innovation" is caused by corporate oversight. How innovative is another issue, but, let's take a look back at history shall we?

5e (2014) rolls out. Now, this is the apologia edition. The fandom had spoken absolutely clearly. This was to be the "greatest hits" edition. Any innovation was absolutely sacrificed on the altar of nostalgia. Remember all the new mechanics that WotC floated in the run up to 2014? I do. Exploding dice for fighters? A shed load of new mechanics for every class?

And every single idea shot down in flames by the fandom. The fandom 100% rejected anything that was innovative that WotC didn't manage to slip under the radar. Was that driving by corporate interests? Not really? In 2013, Hasbro couldn't have cared less about D&D. They had, what, 6 people working in D&D. Less than a dozen. There was zero corporate oversight. And zero innovation was allowed because the fandom absolutely forbade it.

Fast forward to 5e (2024). WotC is given zero choice. 2024 MUST be backwards compatible. The fandom would absolutely lose their poop if it wasn't. So, 2024 is already hobbled for innovation by the fandom. Nothing to do with corporate interference at all. The fans spoke very loudly and very clearly. The revision rules MUST be backward compatible and must be so compatible that both sets of rules can be used concurrently at the same table. And, every single time WotC floated anything that deviated even slightly from what had come before, the fandom came down like a ton of bricks on any idea. New races? New classes? The list of mechanics that went through the wringer of the playtest is very, very long. And anything even slightly creative or innovative got crushed under the boots of the fandom.

Corporate interests hobbling innovation at WotC? Not even the slightest. You want to know why WotC stays in the middle of the road and doesn't really do a whole lot new? Look to the left and right at your game table. THAT'S the reason. And, often that's the reason that smaller companies can get away with bigger changes. It's not Hasbro that's cracking the whip. It's the fans. Someone doesn't like one of the new Kobold books? Ok, fine, they maybe criticize it a bit at the time and then forget about it. Someone doesn't like Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft? They're going to bring it up EVERY SINGLE CHANCE THEY GET, over and over and over and over and over again, in order to scream from the rooftops how bad WotC is and how it's Hasbro and WotC that's ruining D&D.

And it never, ever lets up. It never, ever stops.

I’m not doing a “4e what could’ve been thread” with you, man. Sorry.

 

[mamba]

Ok, so, basically, D&D has never innovated then by that metric.

I would not say never, OD&D, 1e, 1e/2e to 3e, 3e to 4e, 4e to 5e were innovative. You can also say that some settings were innovative for their time I guess.

What I'm questioning is the notion that the "lack of innovation" is caused by corporate oversight.

Caused by it is probably too strong, it is probably mostly caused by good sales, D&D was innovative when it was doing badly. As the saying goes, necessity is the mother of invention

 

[TiQuinn]

Hang on. What? Bringing more people into it? Good grief, how much growth do you actually expect? We've seen the hobby freaking EXPLODE over the past ten years. With no sign that it's shrinking.

Yes.

Put it another way. How many gamers do you think Level Up has brought to D&D compared to the 2024 PHB? WotC has brought more people to the hobby than probably all other games combined. By a very, very large margin.

Sorry, I don’t know what time frame you’re referring to and you’re being very non-specific. We don’t know what the impact of 2024 rule set is yet. You may want to go back and re-read from the start, maybe with a little less anger.

And it continues to do so. When you see statistics like the numbers of different games being run on VTT's and 5e straight up outnumbers all other games combined, what exactly do you think that means? What, there are millions of non-D&D RPG gamers that apparently don't buy books (since no non-WotC publisher is even remotely in the same league as WotC), apparently are invisible on forums and various other social media and only exist in some sort of nebulous quantum state where they vanish if they are observed?

I mean come on. Be serious here.

I’m being serious and I don’t know what your point is but I was talking about a company being innovative rather than iterating on a game.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Whatever dude, agree to disagree.

WotC actually does have a new game coming out, Exodus. It's a sci-fi game that does use the 5E engine. But it's hella innovative within that framework and I'm really excited about it.

Can a product designed to work with or be compatible with D&D 5E be innovative, whether published by WotC or a third-party company? YES.

Innovation does not necessarily mean, new rule set for new game.

I do think it's a shame that WotC doesn't publish RPGs other than D&D anymore, as I am a big fan of some of their earlier, not-D&D releases. But the profits vs resources equation of not-D&D compared to D&D never really worked out for WotC, or for TSR before them. It's also the reason why so many game companies publish D&D compatible products, they tend to be significantly more profitable.

There have been some really innovative and different not-D&D games published over the past decade or so that have had some amazing success . . . but not D&D levels of success, that's tough to crack.

Limiting creation only to things with D&D levels of success is, IMO, the problem.