Congratulations WotC...

[Horwath]

Right now here on 1D&D sub-forum of ENWorld, in last 50 threads, there are 48 about OGL and trashing of it and WotC in general.

The sub-forum that should be for discussing upcoming rework of most successful edition of D&D.

Never have I seen this fast removal of interest for a D&D product.
Not even in the days where it was "in" to bash 4E just for the sake of it.

We came here mostly with enthusiasm for new product, posting our opinions, criticism and own homebrew ideas that we "think" it would sit nice for new edition and commenting on various ideas and your playtest materials.
Hoping that we will get a better, more balanced, even more fun product to add to our favorite hobby collection.

Now, it all looks like it is burned to the ground...

Bravo!



...you might consider hiring Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein as your HR office managers, can't hurt at the moment...

 

[Branduil]

As I said in another thread, I really think 4e's design was a double-edged sword. As many people liked it as hated it.

5e's deliberate inoffensiveness and "blandness"(I'm not using that as a criticism per se) is actively working against it here. When times were good, it worked well, few were especially upset at the idea of playing 5e, but it's not the kind of game that inspires fervent defenders when times are tough. Rather, it's the kind of game where you think "Hmm, this is good, but it could be better if I just.." When everyone is involved in the 5e ecosystem, that's really effective design, because you can find the 5e mod you're looking for! But by actively kicking everyone out, now they've unleashed the desire to "really fix" 5e that's been bubbling for years. We've entered the era of 5e Heartbreakers, and nothing is stopping this train now.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

I was questioning how popular DnDone is going to be before all this happened. With pretty much every person I ask saying they were just going to stay on 5e indefinitely and never switch over.

Now you add in this entire OGL mess and all these competing systems popping up in response, and the playerbase is going to be even further dragged away from the new edition.

What is the WotC / Hasbro response if the new edition is a complete flop? With the majority of the community blanking it to keep playing 5e?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

As I said in another thread, I really think 4e's design was a double-edged sword. As many people liked it as hated it.

5e's deliberate inoffensiveness and "blandness"(I'm not using that as a criticism per se) is actively working against it here.

Exactly.

I was down to defend 4E because there was, to me, something worth defending, something interesting, something new, despite the insane PR gaffes and other screw-ups. And you know what? Every day this goes on, those 4E PR gaffes are looking like really small beans minor incidents by comparison with this.

 

[Branduil]

Exactly.

I was down to defend 4E because there was, to me, something worth defending, something interesting, something new, despite the insane PR gaffes and other screw-ups. And you know what? Every day this goes on, those 4E PR gaffes are looking like really small beans minor incidents by comparison with this.

Yes, I liked it too, and while Pathfinder filled the void for people who wants a 3.x-style game, you could also say that if you wanted a 4e-style game... you just had to play 4e, it was really the only big TTRPG in its style.

If I wanted to clone 4e, I'd have to write like 500 powers without infringing copyright... not easy or quick. Meanwhile, the stuff people like in 5e is all really high-level and easy to adapt. Bound Accuracy and Advantage/Disadvantage are not going to be hard to incorporate into new systems for 3PPs, and just the nature of those mechanics will inherently make conversion from 5e easy, even if they use entirely novel terms.

 

[Princessmaker]

Exactly.

I was down to defend 4E because there was, to me, something worth defending, something interesting, something new, despite the insane PR gaffes and other screw-ups. And you know what? Every day this goes on, those 4E PR gaffes are looking like really small beans minor incidents by comparison with this.

I understand, but the whole idea of 'subordinate' the lore to the mechanics is absurd in any kind of game based on telling a story. It's an absurd, to be honest. That was the dealbreaker to me that time. Forgotten Realms was the othe that suffered the most under it.

Now, with one D&D, it's the real life situation. Most lore is being supressed, changed or subordinated to the political/social view of the moment, it's another absurd, and one that gets you warnings, bans or whatever just touching it. It's like a beehive to hide all the naughty word decisions made by shady companies for maximum profitability.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I understand, but the whole idea of 'subordinate' the lore to the mechanics is absurd in any kind of game based on telling a story.

I mean, this isn't a 4E thread, but the issue that didn't happen with the core 4E setup. It only even arguably happened when 4E was applied to other settings, like the FR. The core 4E aligned setting and lore. Both informed each other. That's basically the same Earthdawn and literally hundreds of other RPGs, though it was novel for D&D.

Forgotten Realms was the othe that suffered the most under it.

Yes, but let's be clear, this was the THIRD TIME the Forgotten Realms had suffered because rules were being put ahead of setting. Because it was the biggest rules change, it also featured the most dramatic idiocy. I won't defend what they did to the FR. It was just dumb. There were other ways to handle it. But again, the third time, with the first being the Time of Troubles, the second being whatever the idiocy was with 3E (involving The Weave somehow? I don't even remember at this point), so unfortunately there was a multi-decade tradition of doing this to the FR when you got a new edition. I'm told the changes even in 3E were so significant they invalidated a bunch of maps (before 5E brought back the old geography).

Most lore is being supressed, changed or subordinated to the political/social view of the moment

ROFL.

What?!? What a segue lol!

Argh laughing pretty hard IRL because "Orcs are no longer basically a racist stereotype" is being compared to "Yo we deleted half of Toril".

 

[WarDriveWorley]

I've been playing DnD in one form or another since 84 or so. Started with 1E, but have played the older stuff later, including chainmail. I've been a staunch purchaser of books put out by TSR/WOTC over those decades of playing and still own crates of books, magazine, and boxed sets devoted to my favorite hobby. 4E was my least favorite version of DnD and I think that was mainly due to the execution and homogenization of classes. But that was purely a personal opinion and I still bought, and continue to won, all the 4E books and supplements. 3E was a golden era for me (with warts and all) because of the sheer amount of third party content that was being added.

I say this not as a brag, but as context.

The OGL has likely pushed me away from purchasing any future WOTC DnD books.

And this pains me. It pains me because a lot of my joy is seeing new rules and settings and adventures even if I don't agree with or like them. Cause even bad content can give inspiration.

Planescape is my favorite setting and I'll miss the upcoming book as a result.

Yes I know I can still use all my old rules.
Yes I know that my decision is a relatively minor one in comparison to WOTC's current revenue.
Yes I know there are alternatives and to be honest I play or have played many of them.

It still pains me though.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

A bit too early to write it all off.
Still the old optimi(zer)st...

 

[WarDriveWorley]

A bit too early to write it all off.
Still the old optimi(zer)st...

Maybe. And if they turn it around I'll be happy to say I was wrong.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

3E was a golden era for me (with warts and all) because of the sheer amount of third party content that was being added.

Yeah, like I didn't love 3.XE's rules, like, at all. The longer I played it, the less I liked them. But I did buy a lot of books in that era, especially between 2000 and 2004? HELL YES. Were a lot of them 3PP ones? Absolutely. And what's interesting is, that's when the other DMs I know and play 5E and other games with also bought an awful lot of books and adventures and so on. Many of them 3PP. Also in that era, players bought more books, in my experience, than they do now, too. Because there were so many books, it was much more likely there was one the DM didn't have. That's probably not a great thing from a sales efficiency perspective, but it's interesting and still shows high total sales.

 

[Horwath]

Haha, just to prove my point @Morrus adds "OGL" and "1D&D" prefix tags.

it would be sad if it isn't funny in a way.

 

[WarDriveWorley]

Also in that era, players bought more books, in my experience, than they do now, too. Because there were so many books, it was much more likely there was one the DM didn't have.

I had that same experience. While I owned the majority (meme for tax) our group overall had a ton of additional books because the others would buy books I didn't or ones we used enough that we needed more than one copy. I don't remember the same happening in 4E and 5E.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

If I wanted to clone 4e, I'd have to write like 500 powers without infringing copyright... not easy or quick.

I bet you would make a better game if you don't write 10 copies of 1 power and instead use power lists and upleveling. And while you are at it, consolidate feats too.

The engine is powerful but suffers from clutter. Actually if you just take the phb fighter and give it essentials style power attack, you have a working fighter.

Maybe also reduce stat increases and reduce 1/2 level bonus to 1/3 level bonus and instead of creating minions for every monster, introduce a crit rule, that if you hit a creature of 5 levels below your level, if you hit by 5 or more, you kill it with a single blow.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I don't remember the same happening in 4E and 5E.

In 4E I saw it a tiny bit, with the power source books, but we stopped buying books almost entirely before long because we were subbed to the DDI once it became available. That probably wasn't the greatest for WotC's profits lol, but more than one sub was dumb because they weren't linked so you need all the characters in one place on the DDI, so we all shared a logon - I think with the character creator weirdly maybe only one person could be on at once and we had to organise, but certainly with the rules encylopedia thing we could all be in it at the same time. Beyond cracked that at least, giving everyone separate and connect-able accounts, with shared content if the DM allows it (and has a paid sub - fair enough honestly).

With 5E we didn't see it at all for two reasons:

1) The books came out extremely slowly, and of them which were vital, I just got more or less immediately, as it wasn't like I was being firehose'd with books like 3E lol.

2) The books I didn't get often did have some player options (races, subclasses), but they weren't really attractive to players because the amount of options were soooooooooooooooo small compared to what was in the book generally. Like, I could easily see a player buying a book with 15+ races and 20+ subclasses or whatever, but instead they've gone up usually with low single digit numbers of either.

That's not a criticism, per se, it was an intentional and conscious strategy, and I have no doubt it was more efficient in the sense that, if you're selling printed books, you're going to sell more copies if every one seems special and important than if you firehose them. But as we increasingly go to digital...

 

[Branduil]

I bet you would make a better game if you don't write 10 copies of 1 power and instead use power lists and upleveling. And while you are at it, consolidate feats too.

The engine is powerful but suffers from clutter. Actually if you just take the phb fighter and give it essentials style power attack, you have a working fighter.

Maybe also reduce stat increases and reduce 1/2 level bonus to 1/3 level bonus and instead of creating minions for every monster, introduce a crit rule, that if you hit a creature of 5 levels below your level, if you hit by 5 or more, you kill it with a single blow.

Oh believe me, I've spent time thinking about my 4e heartbreaker... hard to say if now is a good or bad time to work on that.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Oh believe me, I've spent time thinking about my 4e heartbreaker... hard to say if now is a good or bad time to work on that.

I always wanted to just build characters and play it as an advanced tabletop game.
I really liked 4e (especially how strategical combat worked), but it just did not fit with our available time, so we did not make progression in our adventure.

 

[Retreater]

Let's work on building an analogy that might be a way the suits at Wizards (coming from the video game business) would understand. Those of you who know more about current Triple-A video games might be able to think of real examples.
Let's say you have an enormously big and popular video game, for example Call of Duty. Let's say that game has been more popular than it's ever been.
Let's say that game has a vibrant modding community, creating new maps, skins, etc. Of course many play it online on Xbox, etc, and show livestreams.
So you announce that you're coming out with a new version (as you should every cycle). You announce you want to monetize it more with microtransactions. You're going to destroy the modding community. You're planning to take away the ability to play it on anything but Call of Duty online play network, and live streams are potentially out too.
But they've also told you that Call of Duty is perfect the way it is. It needs only a few gameplay tweaks. People who still have Call of Duty 2014 can play with people who have Call of Duty 2023.
Then they see a massive negative social media campaign, streamers on YouTube with millions of subscribers calling them terrible names, their biggest content creators and live streamers say they're not going with the new game.
So how do you think the suits of WotC are seeing this? Just another day at the office if you are used to the video game industry?

 

[Staffan]

Yes, but let's be clear, this was the THIRD TIME the Forgotten Realms had suffered because rules were being put ahead of setting. Because it was the biggest rules change, it also featured the most dramatic idiocy. I won't defend what they did to the FR. It was just dumb. There were other ways to handle it. But again, the third time, with the first being the Time of Troubles, the second being whatever the idiocy was with 3E (involving The Weave somehow? I don't even remember at this point)

3e actually didn't alter the Realms significantly. I mean, there was still the steady metaplot progression, but it didn't come packed with a Big Event to explain why things are Different. Instead, the official line was something like "The Forgotten Realms books are an approximation of the 'real' Realms, and the 3e books are a better approximation."

In other words, when the Symbul changed from a wizard to a sorcerer, that wasn't an in-setting change but rather that sorcerer is a better fit for whatever she "really" is. Unlike 2e which explained the disappearance of the Assassin class by saying that Bane sucked out the life force of all the assassins to help him fight Torm.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

3e actually didn't alter the Realms significantly. I mean, there was still the steady metaplot progression, but it didn't come packed with a Big Event to explain why things are Different. Instead, the official line was something like "The Forgotten Realms books are an approximation of the 'real' Realms, and the 3e books are a better approximation."

In other words, when the Symbul changed from a wizard to a sorcerer, that wasn't an in-setting change but rather that sorcerer is a better fit for whatever she "really" is. Unlike 2e which explained the disappearance of the Assassin class by saying that Bane sucked out the life force of all the assassins to help him fight Torm.

I mean, they literally and very intentionally rescaled the entire continent to change distances (decreasing them), and moved around some places on the map (not very far in most cases I think, but still). I would personally call that a significant alteration.

I actually thought I'd gone insane or had memory problems when I played 3E FR a bit (we mostly didn't play FR in 3E), because some stuff wasn't where I was very sure it was. Turns out WotC just accidentally gaslighted the hell out of me by not actually telling people they did this.

5E fixed it all, and is the same scales and positions as 2E, interestingly. But I bet that gaslighted a few people who started with 3E lol!

I looked into the event thing, and there was an event planned by they skipped and then quietly added it in as a retcon. Still, the maps changes are kind of nuts.