I'd reskin the stats for githyanki and githzerai. The githyanki are well-designed warrior/wizards who hit hard. Thematically, that feels to me like a mage hunter. Githzerai are unarmed...so they might be infiltrator assassins who scout for a githyanki strike team.
Daggerheart had a very successful launch. I suspect that Matt Mercer is out of bandwidth. He's the face of Critical Role and the creative inspiration behind it. Throw in the animated series and all the other stuff going on. Not enough hours in the day. He needs very senior people he can entrust...
They absolutely have a multiyear plan. Yes, plans can, will, and do change. But the last 10 years of D&D -- the most successful in its history -- are no doubt shaping the plan for the next 10 years. The last thing WotC wants to do is create a new edition. It's time consuming, costly, and high risk.
That's conspiratorial thinking.
They say nothing = "They must be hiding something!"
They say something = "They must be lying!"
Either way, people see it as validation for their pet theory.
Drives me crazy.
There is nothing in the job posting that suggests 6E is in development. Nothing.
This looks like the backfill for Jeremy Crawford. Work with other senior to leaders to develop a product roadmap, decide which rules will be in new products, and develop the rules.
So, what does "rules" mean for...
I love 5E. But, I've had some version of this experience multiple times. Yes, save or suck spells are partly to blame. But what compounds the problem is the sheer versatility of D&D spellcasters. When the same character can cast suggestion, fireball, fly, etc it wreaks havoc with encounter...
I'm sure I've said this before (maybe on this thread!) but in 2017 I got together my old gaming friends. We've been playing at least 30 times per year every since. And it's online. Because we're not only in different parts of the country...we're in different countries. However, we have gotten...
I distinctly remember someone (Jeremy Crawford?) saying that UA feedback indicated 5E players did not want to learn a unique subsystem for psionics. That's likely why we ended up with this expression of psionics.