D&D (2024) A simpler game is a better game...for us

[Amrûnril]

To me they are not making more steamlined or easier. Well easier to program . I twitch occasionally reading some the changes. Having only 3 spell lists means you don't have to create another spell table/database with each new class.
New class spell casting arcane table.

It doesn't even seem to me like there should be more than a trivial difference in programming difficulty. I don't know exactly how WotC/Beyond stores this sort of information, but a reference table with spells as rows and classes as columns would only need a single row added for each new spell and a single column added for each new class.

The developers are saving themselves a very small amount of work by taking away their own ability to make interesting decisions on a class by class basis.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think WoTC is borrowing an idea from Pathfinder 2nd edition. The latter lists magic into four magical traditions- Arcane, Divine, Primal and Occult.

I thought they were borrowing from previous editions, and the third list is the result of decades of pop culture forcing that distinction and WotC bending with the wind.

 

[Incenjucar]

It doesn't even seem to me like there should be more than a trivial difference in programming difficulty. I don't know exactly how WotC/Beyond stores this sort of information, but a reference table with spells as rows and classes as columns would only need a single row added for each new spell and a single column added for each new class.

The developers are saving themselves a very small amount of work by taking away their own ability to make interesting decisions on a class by class basis.

Yeah, this should be trivial unless the design is terrible.

 

[Corinnguard]

I thought they were borrowing from previous editions, and the third list is the result of decades of pop culture forcing that distinction and WotC bending with the wind.

They could have been borrowing mostly from 4th Edition D&D. That edition treated arcane, divine, martial, primal and several others as 'power sources'. I don't think any of the earlier additions of D&D went to such lengths to condense the spells into separate lists.

 

[Incenjucar]

They could have been borrowing mostly from 4th Edition D&D. That edition treated arcane, divine, martial, primal and several others as 'power sources'. I don't think any of the earlier additions of D&D went to such lengths to condense the spells into separate lists.

Yeah, 4E's power source silos were fairly novel, as that edition was much more focused on establishing thematic feel. In previous editions you could theoretically have specialty priests casting fireball.

 

[Corinnguard]

4e was pretty thematic. Fighter-Martial Defender, Paladin-Divine Defender, Swordmage-Arcane Defender, Warden-Primal Defender. Maybe a little too thematic.

 

[Minigiant]

One thing I think D&D can learn from when it finally does a new full edition is to learn from videogames.

Offer classes of all types and all difficulty levels.

The Brute class (Easy and Simple), the Knight Class (Moderate and has Choices), and the Weaponmaster (Complex and Hard)

The Arcanist (Pew Pew), the Warlock (Deal with Invocations), The Wizard (Deal with Spells, Spellbooks,and Preparation)

The Dwatf (More HP), The Elf (Choose from 15 types of Elf), the Clockwork (Build a Robot)

 

[mamba]

It doesn't even seem to me like there should be more than a trivial difference in programming difficulty. I don't know exactly how WotC/Beyond stores this sort of information, but a reference table with spells as rows and classes as columns would only need a single row added for each new spell and a single column added for each new class.

or, to properly normalize it, you would have an allocation table between the two and then all you need is new records and no new columns.

Making it easy for the VTT is definitely not the reason for it…

 

[ZetaShift]

My issue with the simplification model of ODND is that 5e is already simple enough. There is a reason why 5e is the most popular version of DND to date and continues to draw in players by the droves. By emphasizing simplification, they only alienate experienced players who want more crunch out of a lacking system(at times). For example, my issue with the new Druid isn't even mainly balance, although it is weak. It's moreso they completely atomize the fantasy of wildshape for the sake of it being "simple".

The Druid needed streamlining and QoL changes, sure, but to reduce an intentionally complex class to a few factory-made statblocks and make it a more generic spellcaster is an awful solution. Oversimplification is a bad thing after all.