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.

 

[FrogReaver]

Because you cannot tell me that the executives at Hasbro are super-passionate about the contents of a book of monsters.

Maybe we can remedy that with a new monster type, Hasbros?

 

[Minigiant]

Also with Jeremy Crawford love of the Tavern Brawler feat, Dance Bard, and upgraded Monk, and his unshackling from corporate image...

STAY AWAY FROM ANY TAVERNS.​

Homey might be ready to drink and fight.

 

[mamba]

It's literally the opposite of innovation

Innovation isn’t just to make something entirely new

 

[TiQuinn]

Innovation isn’t just to make something entirely new

That’s the definition of innovation. Maybe not entirely, but it has to substantive.

 

[AlViking]

Unless they are creating some new set of rules to improve on something and make it work better, largely no. That’s not to say they aren’t good, or popular or fun.

So something that is not by your definition innovative can still be good, popular and fun? Then we agree. I don't value innovation in and of itself, I value whether I find something does something I want it to do. Like most people despite the hype and innovation I have no need for a Segway.

So 5e may not have been "innovative" but like most editions of D&D for me it improved my experience while playing the game compared to previous versions which is all that matters to me.

 

[Remathilis]

What’s weird to me is that you treat this as a new thing. You and others regularly act like all new 5e books are soulless and only made to sell money. As if all of 5e transitioned away from “art” into “corpo-slop” . . . when do you folks draw the line? Is it still “Tasha’s.”

5e is easy to divide: Everything pre-Tasha's was unbalanced, designed by committee (surveys), overly pandered on nostalgia, crammed everything into the Forgotten Realms whether it was designed for it or not, and lacked the soul of older D&D. Everything post-Tasha's is unbalanced, designed by corporate for the sole purpose of profit, pisses on the legacy and lore of D&D, is destroying every D&D setting rather than just forcing them into the Realms, and lacks the soul of older D&D.

At least, that's what the last 10 years of reading this board has told me.

 

[mamba]

anyone considered that there are people who don’t care that BG3 is D&D?
Sometimes people just want to play a game and don’t want to crawl into the weeds on who made it and where the rules come from.

being aware that BG is D&D is not weeds, and of course there are people that do not care, the two have nothing to do with each other

 

[AlViking]

5e is easy to divide: Everything pre-Tasha's was unbalanced, designed by committee (surveys), overly pandered on nostalgia, crammed everything into the Forgotten Realms whether it was designed for it or not, and lacked the soul of older D&D. Everything post-Tasha's is unbalanced, designed by corporate for the sole purpose of profit, pisses on the legacy and lore of D&D, is destroying every D&D setting rather than just forcing them into the Realms, and lacks the soul of older D&D.

At least, that's what the last 10 years of reading this board has told me.

You forgot an obvious category. Tasha's is unbalanced, designed by corporate for the sole purpose of profit, pisses on the legacy and lore of D&D, is destroying every D&D setting rather than just forcing them into the Realms, and lacks the soul of older D&D.

 

[Remathilis]

You forgot an obvious category. Tasha's is unbalanced, designed by corporate for the sole purpose of profit, pisses on the legacy and lore of D&D, is destroying every D&D setting rather than just forcing them into the Realms, and lacks the soul of older D&D.

My mistake, I should have said "Tasha's on" rather than "post Tasha". So much for parallel construction.

 

[TiQuinn]

So something that is not, by your definition innovative can still be good, popular and fun? Then we agree. I don't value innovation in and of itself, I value whether I find something does something I want it to do. Like most people despite the hype and innovation I have no need for a Segway.

So 5e may not have been "innovative" but like most editions of D&D for me it improved my experience while playing the game compared to previous versions which is all that matters to me.

Zero arguments there.

And again my overall point with this is that there appears to be a limit to how creative one can be within WotC, and once that that limit is reached, it’s time to go elsewhere. To me, that’s not indicative of an innovative company.