Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9869470" data-attributes="member: 18">I don't think it's as simple as that, unfortunately. I think preferences re: interating vs. reinventing are quite complex and a lot will depend on what people started, what edition they enjoyed most, why they enjoyed it and so on. Blanket/sweeping declarations like "iterating is always better/worse or always more/less popular" are, to my mind, irrational and not based in history.Looking at the long, long history of D&D, there are, to my mind, times when they should have iterated, and times when they should have revolutionized. Like, by your logic, 3E should merely have been an iteration of 2E. But had it been that, I think it'd have been completely dead in the water - I don't think it would have been anywhere near as successful as it was. Whereas 4E probably should have been an effective iteration of 3E, bigger than the 0.5-type changes by far, but keeping the basic structure and concepts (moreso than 4E actually did), and at least a vague illusion of semi-compatibility. I think the next one is going to need to be revolutionary or seriously evolutionary (to the degree 5E was to 4E, or 3E to 2E, or PF1 to PF2), rather than merely 5.75E or the like, if it's actually going to move copies, not be part of "managed decline".I think this especially because the vast majority of people playing 5E haven't been through an actual edition-change, and frankly, I think far more of them will be invigorated by it or even brought back from other RPGs/not playing than off-put by it.But I would not suggest this year or next was the time for it to happen. Though maybe an initial announcement late next year, I wouldn't be surprised. And historically, I've been pretty good that guessing WotC will do a thing, but I've tended to overestimate, not underestimate how long it takes them to get there!What I think they do need to learn is that they can't be too driven by whim in terms of what they keep and what they change. I think they need to think pretty damn carefully about that in a way I'm not really sure any edition change prior to 5E did, and that I don't think even 5E adequately considered because it rushed to market (just as 4E did, and to some extent 3E). I think that's the key thing - if they take a slower, more sensible approach to development they should do well.</blockquote>

Verification