D&D 5E (2024) Eye Tyrant. Who Died and Made You Gygax?? Design Your Own D&D 2024X3.

Tigris · Tuesday at 11:33 PM

Zardnaar said:
Here's the scenario. For whatever reason perhaps via Genie you are put in charge of D&D 2024 release. Bit of roleplaying here there's 3 different criteria I'm asking you to design. You don't need to design actually you're the boss order the peons about.

Assume you have a decent budget and you have to produce 1-3 core books. That's all you get though. Pagecount can go as high as 5.5. No you can't rerelease your favorite editions entire line or a 10000 page book New product Otherwise go for it.

3 different products. No wrong answers interested in your thoughts.

1. This edition is make the most money. What do you do?

This is easy. We know D&D 5e only had success because of media coverage, and in the end if something is famous and covered in media its quality does hardly matter. (I mean 5E encounter building was completly broken and it took 10 years for 5.5 to fix it with often 2 times XP budget for same combats and also big changes in monster math). One can see the same with Monopoly, its a game no one who has experience with many modern games likes, it was originally even made to be a bad game, and because its popular it stays popular.

So what do we do?

Hire "celebrities" to design subclasses. Oh critical role wants to make a new season with new characters? They of course can make their own subclasses and we do a cross promotion!

Even go for big streamers of other games (PF2) to make deals with them, letting them change campaign to D&D and show their cool new subclasses from 5.5 they designed.

Maybe even do some movie star (henry caville?) D&D lifestream and then let them design some of subclasses.

Make a deal with netflix or disney plus, that they can use D&D in a new cartoon, and again tie in with new subclasses only released in the 5.5

Sell out the gamedesign to these "famous" people (maybe even youtubers like Treadmonk may design one baseclass each), spend no money on playtesting, but only on marketing/buying into TV shows and streaming.

Zardnaar said:
2. You can command the peons to make your personal love letter to D&D. It only has to appeal to you.

So I would just hire good gamedesigners to make a NEW version of D&D. All people with background from boardgame design and all people with STEM backgrounds. No one who played any edition older than 3(.5). If possible only let them see 3.5 and 4E even.

I want them to create something new, modern. Surprise me. (But let me make a round of change requests before its finished).

Zardnaar said:
3. You can rebuild the game from the ground up doing whatever you like commercial viability be dammed. New classes orange, apples and toast go for it.

I dont see the difference much to the above.

wicked cool · Wednesday at 12:17 AM

GrimCo said:
1. most money

Make it truly modular.
Players handbook - no subclasses, all classes are simple and easy to use, quick chargen, aim for the tropes popular with 15-25 demographic.
Advanced players handbook - subclasses, extra systems that are easy to slap on to basic game, more complexity, but more options, and bring AEDU back
DMG- instructions how to use modularity for achieving desired gameplay experience, from gritty old school to anime over the top power fantasy and anything in between.
MM with monster creation rules, new one every year
PHB2 and APG2 mid cycle with more classes/subclasse, powers and spells. People love more player options, need to milk it.
PHB3 and APG3 end cycle, go all out, give most broken overpowered options of classe/subclasses/powers/spells

With adjustible complexity and variety of gamplay experiences, it captures widest possible audience. Multiple MM/PHB/APG for milking that cash cow.

2. My love letter
5e with AEDU structure. Rework Warblade into 5e with 9 levels of manouvers/stances - thats now baseline fighter. Simple blaster caster using 3.5 warlock as a template. Replace subclasses and MC with ability slots - list of class abilities, each taking one slot, you get one slot at 3-6-9-12-15-18. Pick what you like.

3. Ground up version

Tough one. Honestly, idk.

If I was given the power
1)more races and change the orc back (maybe go pig faced) all in core rule book
2) bring back the classic modules types from 1st and second and not hollow campaign adventures
3) bring back the fear and joy . What makes shadowdark is how deadly it is.

Horwath · Wednesday at 4:35 AM

Not a Decepticon said:
1. Battlemaster features are not enough to close martial-caster disparity

agree, probably not.
As I said, some spells need to be removed or reduced in power.

Not a Decepticon said:
2. Congratulations, you just alienated all grognards and old-school fans who get really mad the second they cannot play a "simple sword & board fighter who only attacks every turn", the same people because of whom maneuvers were relegated to a subclass in the first place.

more like it was WotC that repeatedly claimed that new players are too stupid to understand anything more than rolling a d20.
Sure, they said it more politely: "they do not want to overwhelm new players with options".

that is why we waited 10 years for 1st level feat for all,
that is why subclasses for some classes were moved from 1st and 2nd level to 3rd, but still they managed to axe universal subclassses in the same period.

if anyone should be a simple class, it's the barbarian.

one button: rage.
and little more simplified

everyone has advantage on attacks vs you.
you take halve damage from everything.
add rage bonus to all STR and CON attacks, saves, checks and damage.
treat Acrobatics, Stealth, Insight, Perception, Survival and Intimidation as STR checks

as for simple maneuvers, just have one maneuver that adds +2d8 damage instead of +1d8 damage and some effect.

Not a Decepticon · Thursday at 11:11 AM

Horwath said:
more like it was WotC that repeatedly claimed that new players are too stupid to understand anything more than rolling a d20.
Sure, they said it more politely: "they do not want to overwhelm new players with options".

But the matter of fact is that during the playtest a lot of old-school players complained about the Fighter having maneuvers and were mad they cannot just play a "simple sword & board". You could claim this is WotC lying buuuut... in one of his latest videos about Draw Steel Matt Collville reveals they had a lot of the same people in the playtest, being mad they have to use special powers and maneuvers and cannot just be "simple sword & board" who just attacks each turn, he had to remind them, in the video, Draw Steel is not that kind of game. We have people who argued on this very forum that "simple sword & board" is what they want from d&d and fantasy rpgs in general and even judge any new game by how it is to play one in it.

Horwath said:
if anyone should be a simple class, it's the barbarian.

one button: rage.
and little more simplified

everyone has advantage on attacks vs you.
you take halve damage from everything.
add rage bonus to all STR and CON attacks, saves, checks and damage.
treat Acrobatics, Stealth, Insight, Perception, Survival and Intimidation as STR checks

I agree with you, but the problem is I have voiced this sentiment in an argument (that I cannot find anymore) on this very forum, with a person who was adamant fighters should be simple, and they dismissed the idea instantly with "I don't want to play a raging moron".

Zardnaar · Friday at 10:48 PM

Not a Decepticon said:
But the matter of fact is that during the playtest a lot of old-school players complained about the Fighter having maneuvers and were mad they cannot just play a "simple sword & board". You could claim this is WotC lying buuuut... in one of his latest videos about Draw Steel Matt Collville reveals they had a lot of the same people in the playtest, being mad they have to use special powers and maneuvers and cannot just be "simple sword & board" who just attacks each turn, he had to remind them, in the video, Draw Steel is not that kind of game. We have people who argued on this very forum that "simple sword & board" is what they want from d&d and fantasy rpgs in general and even judge any new game by how it is to play one in it.

I agree with you, but the problem is I have voiced this sentiment in an argument (that I cannot find anymore) on this very forum, with a person who was adamant fighters should be simple, and they dismissed the idea instantly with "I don't want to play a raging moron".

I've had players who dont really want to read the rules tha well for even their own class.

Chose to play a monk. 5.0 we converted to 5.5 at 4th level.

We hit level 9 or 10 before he even read the 5.5 monk and decided to convert over. Played it somewhat poorly and forgot about things like prone and force damage.

Similar things with newbies piloting bards, warlocks etc. If they're not tactical types they make a lot of mistakes.
. Newbie wizards can usually figure out they're a loaded shotgun and can fire it. They're very aggressive burning through spells often out by encounter 3 or 4.

I've seen newer players warlocks not take eldritch blast and not take short rests. Wizards not using rituals, clerics only healing,

Running another newbie games on the 29th. It will be interesting.