Jeremy Crawford Also Leaving D&D Team Later This Month

jeremy crawford.jpg


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.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Christian Hoffer

Christian Hoffer


log in or register to remove this ad


I always laugh when I see people claim there is a “DM shortage.” No there isnt. You just don’t want to try the games the DM/GM wants to run.

“Not D&D 5E? Why is it so hard to find a game to play in?!?!?”. Try Shadowdark or Vampire or Cyberpunk etc. it won’t kill you and you might like it.

There is a bit of the Starbucks problem here. People are willing to pay $6 for Starbucks because they know Starbucks. If you crash your black van into a wall in front of someone, leap out wearing your ski-mask, and demand they pay you $6 for your coffee, they're likely to mace you and run away. It took Starbucks years to build that brand awareness. Same with McDonald's and Coca-Cola.

D&D is a known brand and 5e D&D is a known system. It takes some effort to show players that it's worth their time to learn a new system for some benefit and I don't know that many GMs are really good at that. GMs might love a system but what's in it for the player? As you say, Cyberpunk is a clear difference and if your players are into cyberpunk as a genre, that might be a good sell. Selling an interesting world can work. Selling OSR games might be a little harder ("It's like 5e but with less character options and you'll die more").

I propose that GMs focus on making themselves the brand. Play with your group of friends who trust you and it might be easier to convince them to try something else. "Try" is also important here. "Hey friends, I thought we might try 13th Age for a couple of sessions and see what we think once we're done with our current campaign".

I think it's easier to get a group to try something for a handful of sessions than fully switch away from a system they like to one they don't know about.

It also helps when you can give them the rules for free. I think its important for other RPGs to have some sort of free player guide so players can dig into it without having to invest money in something they don't know anything about and may have little interest in to begin with.

So yeah, I think we GMs can sharpen our skills at convincing groups to try other systems. In the end, our groups may still prefer D&D 5e, which is fine, but we'd at least like to try some other stuff.

I had a lot of success with this approach. In the past few years I've run Shadowdark, Numenera, Blades in the Dark, Tales of the Valiant, A5e, and a few one-shots of other systems like Shadow of the Weird Wizard. My players are all pretty open to trying whatever system I want to try.

I'm hoping to run Shadow of the Weird Wizard, 13th Age, and another Shadowdark campaign this year or next but I'm also totally cool running D&D 2024 or Tales of the Valiant as well.
 

There is a bit of the Starbucks problem here. People are willing to pay $6 for Starbucks because they know Starbucks. If you crash your black van into a wall in front of someone, leap out wearing your ski-mask, and demand they pay you $6 for your coffee, they're likely to mace you and run away. It took Starbucks years to build that brand awareness. Same with McDonald's and Coca-Cola.

D&D is a known brand and 5e D&D is a known system. It takes some effort to show players that it's worth their time to learn a new system for some benefit and I don't know that many GMs are really good at that. GMs might love a system but what's in it for the player? As you say, Cyberpunk is a clear difference and if your players are into cyberpunk as a genre, that might be a good sell. Selling an interesting world can work. Selling OSR games might be a little harder ("It's like 5e but with less character options and you'll die more").

I propose that GMs focus on making themselves the brand. Play with your group of friends who trust you and it might be easier to convince them to try something else. "Try" is also important here. "Hey friends, I thought we might try 13th Age for a couple of sessions and see what we think once we're done with our current campaign".

I think it's easier to get a group to try something for a handful of sessions than fully switch away from a system they like to one they don't know about.

It also helps when you can give them the rules for free. I think its important for other RPGs to have some sort of free player guide so players can dig into it without having to invest money in something they don't know anything about and may have little interest in to begin with.

So yeah, I think we GMs can sharpen our skills at convincing groups to try other systems. In the end, our groups may still prefer D&D 5e, which is fine, but we'd at least like to try some other stuff.

I had a lot of success with this approach. In the past few years I've run Shadowdark, Numenera, Blades in the Dark, Tales of the Valiant, A5e, and a few one-shots of other systems like Shadow of the Weird Wizard. My players are all pretty open to trying whatever system I want to try.

I'm hoping to run Shadow of the Weird Wizard, 13th Age, and another Shadowdark campaign this year or next but I'm also totally cool running D&D 2024 or Tales of the Valiant as well.

Im lucky that my current group is open to try anything but getting a whole new group together for like Cyberpunk or anything not DD5E isnt going to happen.
 



I propose that GMs focus on making themselves the brand. Play with your group of friends who trust you and it might be easier to convince them to try something else. "Try" is also important here. "Hey friends, I thought we might try 13th Age for a couple of sessions and see what we think once we're done with our current campaign".
To me, this is the only way to be successful as a GM. I'm going on a trip and going to play some OSR D&D on it. That is ... not my favorite flavor of RPG at all. And yet, my friend who runs the game could run any game system and it would be fun. With my friends when I run a game, I have established enough good will that they'd try just about anything I'd suggest to them.

That's the key, for so many reasons. For us older players, there's so much that we need to do during a day, so much that we really should be doing. Playing a game for me is a luxury that I can barely afford. I do it because it's like coffee in the morning for my soul. And I have trust that my friend will run a great game that I'll enjoy.

That's all but impossible when you're recruiting a new group of players online who don't know you, but I've found that enthusiasm for the game goes a long way. But it's so much better to play with friends who you've established trust with.
 




Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top