Search results

yes, but every option they presented was already compatible enough or it would not have been included in the playtest, and yet they dropped options that the playtest identified as popular enough to make it past the threshold over concerns with compatibility. So the level of compatibility...

they said that anything they presented in the playtests were things that could make it into the new game, not just some wild test balloons, and that they were looking for feedback / popularity. They then later said they dropped some features that made it past the poll threshold because they...

well, you were the one saying it does not at all and I replied to that, so yeah, that was the topic at hand, not the OP did you read more than the first line of my reply? That would have answered this… no, but into a rebuttal of your ‘D&D has not had a single innovation in 40 years’ claim /...

agreed, but the question was does D&D innovate I pointed to what imo was the biggest / most obvious innovation as I assumed that you could not dispute it, not the only or most recent one You do have a point that the fanbase is reluctant to allow changes for whatever reason(s), but that is not...

it’s not about liking it or not, it’s about whether it is considered a big change in comparison to what came before it, all the way back to 1e (if the last innovation / big change were 40 years ago, as claimed). If 1e and 4e are ‘basically the same, certainly no innovation to be found’ then...

if this were accurate, no… No matter what you think qualifies as a big change, the most recent one must at a minimum be 4e, or newer than that. If 4e was not a big change then there basically are almost no TTRPGs that are a big change removed from D&D and the whole industry does not innovate

there is no point in looking for actual sales data unless you get the same slice of actual data for both the 2014 and 2024 books, and you are not getting that. Whether you use the Bookscan numbers or not, you are at best reading tealeaves as also noted earlier they never were reliable to begin...

Chances are there are hundreds of thousands of unaccounted copies, from DDB alone digital, print and bundles of the two (which would count as two copies sold...)

there is a difference between not reliable and completely absent, and even if they still were not reliable, two unreliable numbers do not get you to a reliable difference between them

not really, WotC does not report their direct book sales to Bookscan for example, and by now that apparently is a pretty sizable chunk of the market. There most likely are other differences in the data collection approach too (Amazon)

ok, I see where you are coming from now. To me that will always be the reaction of most people though, so it is not a good indicator of when to start work on a new edition. The real indicator, as for any other edition, will be low sales, until then WotC will not work on one.

not sure how you arrive at this conclusion, given that we have no idea what the changes in the hypothetical new version are (apart from not being a complete turn-off) the logical next step from my perspective is to take a look next rather than either to jump in blind or reject it blindly. I...

to be fair, I left TTRPGs during 2e and returned during 5e, so I missed some stuff that came and went (and some stuff that is sticking around too, I am sure) ;) Sounds like something the OSR is using in its adventures today however. Not sure 4e was the first to use it or if it would fail your...

Mine would be Shadow of the Weird Wizard / Demon Lord (the better 5e) Dragonbane (as old school as I would like to get) Savage Worlds (for everything else)

it’s the new hot thing, would be interesting to see where it is on a poll like this in two to three years

are we talking about rules or adventures? Novels are completely recognizable for over a hundred years, add to this that WotC frequently rehashes earlier modules and you being able to recognize them as adventures is not a surprise, I would be concerned (about WotC’s ability to produce something...

you cannot just redefine what words mean and then say ‘but this is how I use them’, not without causing confusion at least

it wasn’t a comparison to what WotC does, it was trying to see where @Hussar draws the line on It means nothing assembled from preexisting parts can ever be innovative, even if they never were assembled in this particular way in which they now serve a different purpose or better meet an...

agreed, the original question was not limited to 2024 however but to 50 years of D&D agreed, but based on the ‘innovation means it needs to be something new, not just using parts that already existed’ even songs would not qualify, Based on that criteria, 99.9% of ‘innovations’ would not be...

or improve / change something existing by combining existing things in a new way (and adding some ideas of its own) Songs all use existing notes, does that mean there is no such thing as new music?