• COMING SOON! -- Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition! Level up your 5E game! The standalone advanced 5E tabletop RPG adds depth and diversity to the game you love!
log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E D&D Head Talks Future Plans (Sort Of)

WotC has launched a new design blog. The first edition is written by D&D head Ray Winninger, and he talks a little about future plans.

dnd_header_blog04.jpg


"Later in the year, Chris will return with our big summer adventure, James Wyatt will deliver a substantially improved version of a concept that I initiated myself, and Amanda Hamon will close us out with a project that was jointly conceived by herself and several other studio members. As usual, Jeremy Crawford is working with all of our leads, overseeing mechanical content and rules development.

In addition to these five major products, look for a couple of additional surprises we’ll unveil in the months ahead."

You can read the full blog here:


He also mentions that a D&D book takes 12-14 months to make, and half the projects developed don't make it to market. Winninger describes the structure of WotC's 'D&D Studio':

"The D&D Studio itself is organized into four departments: Game Design, Art, Production, and Product Management, each led by a department head. Game Design is responsible for the developing game mechanics and stories. Art establishes the “look and feel” of Dungeons & Dragons by creating visual concepts, directing our freelance illustrators, and creating innovative graphic designs. The Production department manages our project schedules, interfaces with manufacturing experts, and generally handles administrative matters for the studio. The Product Management department interfaces with sales, marketing, and market research. They also own our long-term product roadmap and look after the D&D business."

The studio has five Product Leads: Jeremy Crawford, Amanda Hamon, Chris Perkins, Wes Schneider, and James Wyatt.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Russ Morrissey

Russ Morrissey

Parmandur

Book-Friend
That, at least, is completely subjective. I, personally, couldn't possible disagree more strongly.
I like the 5E style better, but it is most definitely subjective. Art & Arcana gave the 4E art a really good appraisal and appreciation. The layout of information in 4E was relatively overwhelming, though, I have a much easier time reading something in 5E and understanding what it does (I are English Major, colors and boxes confuse me).
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Bolares

Hero
The 4E books gave off a bit of a College textbook vibe. I perused the large collection at Half-Price Books in early 5E days, to see if I could crib any for 5E material on the cheap, and...it was a bit if a slog to read them for flavor or inspiration.
one thing I liked about 4e campaign settings was that they had skil check CDs for player information in almost every topic, and multiple skills too...
 

4E was about moving to computer based games. It was designed to transition D&D to the digital era. That is why it had much more of a 'choose A, B, C, or D to do' feel. 5E was a reversion back towards live play as someone realized they'd never really 'out video game' the video game companies.
Maybe if the designer for 4e's intended integrated VTT and other digital tools didn't commit a murder-suicide and thus making 4e have to launch without its digital support, 4e might have had more success.
 
Last edited:

Parmandur

Book-Friend
one thing I liked about 4e campaign settings was that they had skil check CDs for player information in almost every topic, and multiple skills too...
Never got past the PHB, in terms of real engagement, beyond flipping through some books to see if they were of interest.
 


doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
4E's "downfall" had nothing to do with the game itself, but with WotC failure to critically engage with and quantify the desires of their audience. That's why 5E took off, they did that work for years before putting togethera product. 4E the designers made the game that they wanted, for their playstyle, and assumed that was what everyone would respond to. That can work for Indie developers, but not for D&D.

That, and releasing the game too early and relying on errata to patch things...but that's not the game, either, but WotC managing their workflow improperly.
Pretty much, yeah.
I like the 5E style better, but it is most definitely subjective. Art & Arcana gave the 4E art a really good appraisal and appreciation. The layout of information in 4E was relatively overwhelming, though, I have a much easier time reading something in 5E and understanding what it does (I are English Major, colors and boxes confuse me).
The layout needed a serious overhaul from day one, for sure.
Well, fair. It at least shows off more diversity, which is handy for a younger audience.
Im not sure I believe that it's significantly more diverse, since the 4e art was quite diverse already, especially in terms of showing non-humans in a variety of ethnic coding.
 

Urriak Uruk

Debate fuels my Fire
Im not sure I believe that it's significantly more diverse, since the 4e art was quite diverse already, especially in terms of showing non-humans in a variety of ethnic coding.

Yeah, considering how I'm not even sure ethnic coding is a good thing (is it a positive that we portray anthropomorphic races as similar to non-white cultures?) I definitely think it is a positive that there seems to be more non-white humans so front-and-center in 5E.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Pretty much, yeah.

The layout needed a serious overhaul from day one, for sure.

Im not sure I believe that it's significantly more diverse, since the 4e art was quite diverse already, especially in terms of showing non-humans in a variety of ethnic coding.
One thing in 5E art, versus 4E or 3E art, is that the people (including Gnomes and magical fairies) look more like people, if that makes sense?
 

Bolares

Hero
Yeah, considering how I'm not even sure ethnic coding is a good thing (is it a positive that we portray anthropomorphic races as similar to non-white cultures?) I definitely think it is a positive that there seems to be more non-white humans so front-and-center in 5E.
I can only say so much, but my black friends were pretty happy when black gnomes, elves and other ancestries started to show up.
 



doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
One thing in 5E art, versus 4E or 3E art, is that the people (including Gnomes and magical fairies) look more like people, if that makes sense?
I guess, from a certain POV.
Yeah, considering how I'm not even sure ethnic coding is a good thing (is it a positive that we portray anthropomorphic races as similar to non-white cultures?) I definitely think it is a positive that there seems to be more non-white humans so front-and-center in 5E.
Yes, it's positive that dwarves, elves, halflings, etc aren't all one apparent ethnicity, and that some anthro species have some coded elements rather than trying to make them purely alien or animal based.

And no, I don't believe that more humans are presented as POC in 5e vs 4e. Especially with all the backsliding early 5e did on other things related to racism (orcs, etc).
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
I guess, from a certain POV.

Yes, it's positive that dwarves, elves, halflings, etc aren't all one apparent ethnicity, and that some anthro species have some coded elements rather than trying to make them purely alien or animal based.

And no, I don't believe that more humans are presented as POC in 5e vs 4e. Especially with all the backsliding early 5e did on other things related to racism (orcs, etc).
I don't think that more are PoC, but more are coded as particular recognizable individual PoC: the Iconic Human, Fighter, and Wizard being definitely Black, or the Asian Half-Elf page spread in the PHB, as opposed to any of the 3E iconics, who were...less clearly defined or coded?
 

Urriak Uruk

Debate fuels my Fire
Yes, it's positive that dwarves, elves, halflings, etc aren't all one apparent ethnicity, and that some anthro species have some coded elements rather than trying to make them purely alien or animal based.

Yeah, I disagree with this pretty strongly. I'll use World of Warcraft as an example; it makes me uncomfortable that Tauren are given a very Native American-like culture, while trolls are given a very indigenous Aztec/Incan culture (and Jamaican accents!) and Pandaren are the obvious Chinese analogue... it does send a subliminal message that the "white humans" are human, while the "non-white cultures" are not-human, or more-animal.

I think D&D has actually done fairly well in 5E with diversity, which is why I used WoW as the example.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I don't think that more are PoC, but more are coded as particular recognizable individual PoC: the Iconic Human, Fighter, and Wizard being definitely Black, or the Asian Half-Elf page spread in the PHB, as opposed to any of the 3E iconics, who were...less clearly defined or coded?
I didn't speak to 3e for a reason, I despise that edition and haven't looked at any of it's books other than Races of Stone, where my eyes glaze over when I try to read any mechanical information but the lore is very good, in at least a decade and a half.

But 4e and 5e I am very familiar with, and I don't think 5e has more diverse representation, in general. It may very well be better in terms of representing Black folks specifically, though, especially in the PHB. But IIRC there is a ton of dark skinned dwarf and halfling art in 4e.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
I didn't speak to 3e for a reason, I despise that edition and haven't looked at any of it's books other than Races of Stone, where my eyes glaze over when I try to read any mechanical information but the lore is very good, in at least a decade and a half.

But 4e and 5e I am very familiar with, and I don't think 5e has more diverse representation, in general. It may very well be better in terms of representing Black folks specifically, though, especially in the PHB. But IIRC there is a ton of dark skinned dwarf and halfling art in 4e.
I won't dispute that, not familiar enough with 4E art really, though what I do remember is Wayne Reynolds stuff, so not that different from 3E IMO. Maybe what I am saying is that I am not a big fan of the way Wayne Reynolds depicts PoC?
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Yeah, I disagree with this pretty strongly. I'll use World of Warcraft as an example; it makes me uncomfortable that Tauren are given a very Native American-like culture, while trolls are given a very indigenous Aztec/Incan culture (and Jamaican accents!) and Pandaren are the obvious Chinese analogue... it does send a subliminal message that the "white humans" are human, while the "non-white cultures" are not-human, or more-animal.

I think D&D has actually done fairly well in 5E with diversity, which is why I used WoW as the example.
You're not reading what I write. I said that it's good that the "close to human" races are diverse (as are the actual humans), and that some anthro races have some coded elements.

WoW doesn't fit what I said at all, with it's mostly white humans, elves that are either white or unnaturally color-coded by culture and white-coded in features, and dwarves that look like somewhat darker skinned Slavic folks at the darkest, and it's other races been very very monolithic in culture, with cultures that are blatant and direct full-on analogues to specific real world cultures.

The two are completely different types of worldbuilding, and not even remotely analogous to eachother. WoW is exactly the sort of world that I'd hold up as the antithetical example to showcase how diverse 4e and 5e both are.
 


Visit Our Sponsor

Latest threads

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top