D&D 5E (2024) Where Are All The New Books In 2026 (D&Dfans article)

[Henadic Theologian]

Where Are All the New D&D Books in 2026?

Why hasn’t Wizards of the Coast announced any new D&D books for 2026? We look at what may be happening internally and what we may see in the coming year.

dungeonsanddragonsfan.com

The silence is deafening and it feels weird.

 

[TiQuinn]

“While it’s not entirely clear why WotC hasn’t yet announced any new products for 2026, there are few possibilities“

So in other words, there’s actually nothing to say but we’re going to speculate wildly anyways.

 

[Reynard]

Where Are All the New D&D Books in 2026?

Why hasn’t Wizards of the Coast announced any new D&D books for 2026? We look at what may be happening internally and what we may see in the coming year.

dungeonsanddragonsfan.com

The silence is deafening and it feels weird.

That is a nice little article; definitely less click-baity than I expected (not having any exoerience with the blog previously).

Of all the arguments, I think the one that makes the most sense is that leadership changes caused some strategy shifts, thereby pushing back planned releases and maybe even eliminating some. I am not sure I totally buy that WotC is going to sacrifice dead tree sales for Beyond sales, but what do I know? I am almost always wrong about this stuff.

In either case, I am not likely to be the target audience going forward. D&D 2024 is my least favorite 5E variant by far, so anything tied directly to that is not going to be my cuppa.

 

[Reynard]

So in other words, there’s actually nothing to say but we’re going to speculate wildly anyways.

Did you read the article? It isn't a histrionic screed. It is just some thoughtful conjecture on what could be happening.

 

[TiQuinn]

Did you read the article? It isn't a histrionic screed. It is just some thoughtful conjecture on what could be happening.

Yes, I read the article. It’s algorithm bait.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Man, we all gotta learn to be more patient.

 

[Charlaquin]

So in other words, there’s actually nothing to say but we’re going to speculate wildly anyways.

Well, nothing has been said by WotC. That information does constitute something to say, because it is out of the ordinary. We have no real information to inform speculation about why they haven’t said anything, but it is still noteworthy that they haven’t.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Yes, I read the article. It’s algorithm bait.

It is not.

It's surprisingly well-written, and quite bad behaviour to mischaracterize it so badly. Especially the era of AI-slop articles which literally are algorithm-bait. If it was bait, it'd sensationalistic or controversial. It's neither of those things. If anything, it shuts down more OTT speculation or hand-wringing.

So in other words, there’s actually nothing to say but we’re going to speculate wildly anyways.

Bolded part literally false. I don't believe for one cold second you'd read the article when you wrote that, even if you read it before you responded to the question. Where does it "speculate wildly"?

Listing the possibilities for why they haven't isn't "speculating wildly", it's just listing possibilities. And rather than being wild, they're all pretty straightforward and reasonable and discourage panic or extreme reactions, rather than being sensationalistic.

The only things they speculate about are the settings, and they offer two possibilities - RL and DS, hardly insane or fevered speculation. Indeed, this very website, ENworld, is actually listing DS, together with a date. Is this site speculating wildly?

Man, we all gotta learn to be more patient.

Ok now I have to ask, did you read the article? Because it seems like you did not.

The article's main point is to discuss the reasons why WotC wouldn't have done it's usual thing of releasing a schedule, and indeed, is if anything, calming, and encourages patience, by logically and reasonably exploring the possibilities, in a frankly a shockingly non-hyperbolic way.

What's impatient or unreasonable about the article exactly?

I have to admit, when I saw the headline, I rolled my eyes, but when I read the article, I was very surprised at how reasonable it was.

 

[TiQuinn]

quite bad behaviour

I think your bad behavior meter is in need of a tune-up then. Regardless, I couldn’t care less of your opinion on my behavior.

Where does it "speculate wildly"?

It is literally a recap of events at WotC for the past year sprinkled with unsubstantiated comments like this:

“Taken together, however, they represent a major internal transition that could have disrupted the usual design and product pipeline.”

“And while officially, WotC leadership has said that the 2024 core books are the fastest selling D&D books ever, there’s evidence that suggests it hasn’t quite been the home run WotC was hoping for.”

This is just low hanging fruit that we’ve heard throughout the year assuming you follow RPGs which I’m pretty sure the folks commenting so far do.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It is literally a recap of events at WotC for the past year sprinkled with unsubstantiated comments like this:

This is just low hanging fruit that we’ve heard throughout the year assuming you follow RPGs which I’m pretty sure the folks commenting so far do.

That's clearly not "wild speculation". In fact, the "low hanging fruit" claim directly contradicts your "wild speculation" claim. It can't be both.

As for "unsubstantiated", this isn't the NYT of yesteryear my dude (the often low-rent NYT of the present day is another matter), this is a normal article, and it absolute isn't unreasonable or ridiculous or wild to say:

“Taken together, however, they represent a major internal transition that could have disrupted the usual design and product pipeline.”

There's nothing wrong with that, and you've totally failed to explain what you think is wrong with it beyond saying "unsubstantiated", which is a far milder objection than "wild speculation" and not a very compelling one, given the statement is carefully-worded and reasonable.

“And while officially, WotC leadership has said that the 2024 core books are the fastest selling D&D books ever, there’s evidence that suggests it hasn’t quite been the home run WotC was hoping for.”

Also what's your problem here? It's quite possible for this to be true from both perspectives - fastest selling and not selling as much as wanted - and part of the evidence is indeed the major transitions WotC has made.

In fact this is common in corporate environments - a product is a success - even a major success - but it was expected to be an absolute home run, an smash hit. You see it with movies that "only" make $600-700m instead of $1bn. You see it with videogames that "only" selling 5m copies at launch when internal decision-makers had been projecting 8m or 10m. They're still profitable. They're still successes, but because of corporate expectations being higher, this causes reappraisal and changes of direction and management pretty frequently.