D&D 5E Am I no longer WoTC's target audience?

[Wulffolk]

@dave2008

I suppose it is a little bit of everything, just a growing dissatisfaction with 5e. I loved the core rule books when they were released. I was never happy with the slow release schedule, but I trusted that I would eventually see more source books that interested me.

Here we are, years later, and I am still underwhelmed by what has been released. I have even bought Pathfinder 2e, and have more hope for it's potential than any expectations that remain for 5e.

While I am sure that there are people that have valid reasons to disagree with me, I would have love to see D&D take an approach closer to what White Wolf did with the World of Darkness, publishing well-written source books in a traditional fantasy setting with lots of depth, and left the adventure paths and alternate settings to 3rd parties.

 

[dave2008]

@dave2008

I suppose it is a little bit of everything, just a growing dissatisfaction with 5e. I loved the core rule books when they were released. I was never happy with the slow release schedule, but I trusted that I would eventually see more source books that interested me.

Here we are, years later, and I am still underwhelmed by what has been released. I have even bought Pathfinder 2e, and have more hope for it's potential than any expectations that remain for 5e.

While I am sure that there are people that have valid reasons to disagree with me, I would have love to see D&D take an approach closer to what White Wolf did with the World of Darkness, publishing well-written source books in a traditional fantasy setting with lots of depth, and left the adventure paths and alternate settings to 3rd parties.

Thanks for the clarification. I'm in a very different place than you. Personally all I need is the core books. However, 5e is the first edition where I have been interested in anything more than the core books and it is really the only edition I have purchased more than the core books. My 5e library is now larger than my 1e, 2e, 3e, and 4e library combined! If I add BECMI, 5e trails by a little. So I guess what had been bad for you has been good for me? It doesn't seem like your interested in 3PP stuff or DMsGuild, but there is just tons of setting, source, player options, and monsters available with that route.

Just to be clear, we don't play in official campaign settings, we have always (for the last 30+ years) used our own hombrew settings. So source books and campaign settings have traditionally had very little draw for me.

I picked up PF2e too and I find it interesting form a design perspective, but after spending about half a year with it I am pretty sure it is not a game I want to DM. If I can find a group (no luck so far) I may try playing it though. We skipped 3e / PF1 so maybe that is why it doesn't interest me as much. I don't know.

 

[MGibster]

It's the same type of nerd rage you get with people saying dragonborn and tieflings don't belong in FR or Grayhawk or Dark Sun or (insert other setting that existed before WotC put them in the PHB), saying it ruins "their" (insert setting). And the Acq Inc book is canon, which you know how much nerds LOVE canon unless it goes against what they perceive as the "One True Canon", such as the Faction War in Planescape, anything after 1984 for Grayhawk, and so on.

When I ran the latest Ravenloft campaign I only allowed races that were found in the PHB. I didn't feel the Aaracockra had a place in the setting. I don't really feel Dragonborn have a place either but I'm loathed to restrict the basic races from the PHB because most players have an expectation that they'll be available. I don't experience nerd rage but I don't think every race belongs in every setting.

 

[3catcircus]

So, referring back to my post you responded to: you're OK with / you like 5e as a game; however, you don't like the content WotC has provided since the core books, and this is making you turn away from 5e? Is that correct?

For the most part. The core mechanics are solid. The adventures are mostly subpar and campaign support feels like an afterthought. Where were the major 5e adventures set in, campaign setting-wise? Most have been set in FR. Where's the 5e FRCS? Saltmarsh, while originally set in Greyhawk, is setting agnostic. Cheese of Strahd?

Instead we get Ravnica, Tal'dorei and Wildemount. So yes, I'm not thrilled with the content.

And, as previously mentioned, new not-adventure books are more "here's the same thing as in the PHB and DMG, but now in blue AND red."

 

[dave2008]

For the most part. The core mechanics are solid. The adventures are mostly subpar and campaign support feels like an afterthought. Where were the major 5e adventures set in, campaign setting-wise? Most have been set in FR. Where's the 5e FRCS? Saltmarsh, while originally set in Greyhawk, is setting agnostic. Cheese of Strahd?

Traditionally, that is none of the stuff I care about, yet for some reason I've purchased most of it in 5e. Not sure why that is. I don't use the published adventures (never have), nor the settings (again never have). Yet, in addition to the PHB, MM, & DMG (and not including 3PP) I have purchased:

• Starter's Set
• Hoard of the Dragon Queen
• Rise of Tiamat
• Princes of the Apocalypse
• Out of the Abyss
• Storm King's Thunder
• Tomb of Annihilation
• Descent into Avernus
• Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide
• Xanthar's Guide to Everything
• Volo's Guide to Monsters
• Mordekainen's Tome of Foes
• Guildmaster's Guide to Ravnica
• Eberron: Rising from the Last War

And, for the most part, I have really enjoyed my purchases. I am still not running any of the adventures or using any of the campaign settings, but there is almost always been enough content worth the purchase for me. I guess they just hit the right mix of content for me. Since, evidently, I had to wait 30+ years for them to get it right, I'm not too concerned about the 4+yrs the content has been lacking for you

 

[Parmandur]

Just about all of the non-core 5e products have followed the same format: throw some stuff in for players and some stuff in for DMs, roll it around in a dusting of old campaign setting sugar if applicable, and declare it goodness.

That sounds really great when you describe it that way: content for everyone, with a nice dose of flavor.

Anyways, I like it, and it's what sells. Fortuitous.

 

[Anoth]

But it doesn't follow D&D 5E rules!

I am sure we will see a my little pony rulebook for 5E before ravenloft or dark sun or greyhawk.

 

[Fenris-77]

I think they'd do a full Ravenloft setting before Dark Sun, and probably well before Greyhawk, and I'd probably slot My Little Pony in somewhere after Dark Sun but before Greyhawk.

 

[Parmandur]

I think they'd do a full Ravenloft setting before Dark Sun, and probably well before Greyhawk, and I'd probably slot My Little Pony in somewhere after Dark Sun but before Greyhawk.

Nah, both Dark Sun and Greyhawk are pretty likely. Dark Sun is one of their most popular Settings, and the people in charge looooove Greyhawk.

 

[Fenris-77]

I know they love Greyhawk, but that doesn't mean it's way up the design queue. Dark Sun, well, yeah, given the psionic play testing that does seem likely. Ravenloft would let them so a nice set of Gothic/horror rules and whatnot, which would set it apart nicely from the other stuff they've done. That said, maybe they're ok with having done CoS and that's it for now. IDK. Greyhawk though, for a bunch of reasons, is going to be tough for them to market to new players IMO. It depends on how much juice they think they can wring out of second hand nostalgia I guess, because right now, without anything else, that's about all Greyhawk has going for it for the new player.