D&D (2024) 6E When?

[Mistwell]

Is it?

Because all through the playtest it was "D&D for everyone who ever loved D&D"

Ah, the lie trotted out again, and spun in a new and even more inventive way.

It's baloney Tony. That was never what they said, but more importantly (and don't cherry pick the first part of this sentence out of context please) IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ISSUE OF THE RULES PRESENTATION NEEDS TO BE STORY THEMED, they never ever even vaguely implied there was some conflicting interest with "D&D for everyone who ever loved D&D" in terms of that kind of rules PRESENTATION.

Yep. It could be.

But you cut the rest of my post which already responds to what you had to say after that period.

Let's do that again. What is your response to this?

"But given we don't have any data showing it's been harming the edition popularity, and it was the idea from the beginning to make it popular, and it is popular, it sure seems like continuing with that theme is wiser than not continuing with it. You would need some pretty good evidence showing it's both incidental to success and holding back success to make a major change in that theme at this point.

So what's the evidence showing it's incidental, and the evidence showing it has held back success, sufficient to overcome the burden of "it's working so don't mess with success" that is the 1000 ton locomotive driving this edition right now?"

 

[Umbran]

Ah, the lie trotted out again, and spun in a new and even more inventive way.

Mod Note:

I think you need to be rather more careful about calling things lies.

There are many differences of opinion on these boards. Even if you think a thing is well established fact, and someone does not agree with it... calling what they say a lie is not gong to take the discussion in a constructive direction - it makes the discussion about speaker honesty, not about whether what they say is correct.

So really, take more care next time, please. Thanks.

 

[Weiley31]

The only good thing about a PHB 2 for 3.5 was the Duskblade.

 

[Parmandur]

Taking it as such is basically just a STFU to any sort of discussion. Oh, the games doing so well, everything must continue to be done exactly as it is right now or it'll all crash & burn, don't even talk about anything that might not be perfect, it's all perfect, don't change a thing! great job WotC!

Nobody is saying anything is "perfect," but in the specific case of enumerated Core books, WotC conducted an experiment, found it failed after a handful of years, and has provided plausible explanations of the failure that ring true to human psychology. There really needs to be a plausible conspiracy theory to entertain an alternative possibility.

Similarly with the D&D Adventure System boardgames, which are running on a simplified 4E variant, they have also provided well grounded explanations of why they aren't rocking the boat with a working product.

 

[ssvegeta555]

3.5 PHBII was amazing. Had a lot of good content like the duskblade, spaheshift druid variant, fun spells for all classes and great high level feats. I find it an essential release. But content aside, I can see how the name can confuse some. Some might think it's a sequel, or an updated PHB obsoleting the first one, rather than an expanded book of options. At least it's not as confusing as Overwatch 2 and Path of Exile 2.

 

[happyhermit]

I can think of one boardgame that named an expansion "The Expansion" (after they botched the name the first time), surely this is the way of the future. Before long all expansions released will be "Expansion 2" "Expansion 3" etc. it's just a really great strategy in every way, leave it to Wotc to throw away such an inspiring idea and replace it with something less formulaic.

 

[Hussar]

Let's not forget, it wasn't just PHB II. There was the PHB II and III DMG II, MM II and III, AND a Martial Power II as well.

All in a span of what, 3 years? They were flooding the shelves with books and the titles weren't exactly clear were they? What is a DMG II? What is a Monster Manual III? Because, really, the sequel books aren't all equal. PHB I, II and III had all fairly similar content - class stuff. But, DMG II had largely completely different content from DMG I and you really needed DMG I to DM the game. But, you could quite easily play with a PHB II and a Monster Manual II.

@Tony Vargas is ignoring the context of the situation when Mearl's talked about the numbering being confusing. It wasn't JUST a PHB II. There were EIGHT books in the core line (PHB/DMG/MM) and which ones you needed to play was certainly not clear just by looking at the covers.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

5th Edition was published in 2014. Maybe we will see in 2027 something like a Advanced Dungeon & Dragons 50th Anniversary Edition.

3.5 was fabulous, but too complex for newcomers.

Now players want to buy the remake of classic titles, or updated crunch, and new classes. A new edition isn't necessary because nothing has to be fixed yet.

A board game for +7y children would need really simple rules, and for +12 something more complex is possible.

The right strategy should be a d20 system game but set in the modern age, or an updated of d20 Future (Star*Drive, Dark-Matters, Star Frontiers or Gamma World). This would be a lower risk to introduce some new ideas.