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.

"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:

Who We Are & What We Do | D&D Studio Blog | Dungeons & Dragons

The first of many design blogs, direct from your friends at the Dungeons & Dragons Studio!

dnd.wizards.com

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.

 

[Parmandur]

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).

 

[Bolares]

Did they ever end?

They did when my favourite edition won!

 

[Urriak Uruk]

That, at least, is completely subjective. I, personally, couldn't possible disagree more strongly.

Well, fair. It at least shows off more diversity, which is handy for a younger audience.

 

[Bolares]

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...

 

[PsyzhranV2]

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.

 

[Parmandur]

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.

 

[Bolares]

Never got past the PHB, in terms of real engagement, beyond flipping through some books to see if they were of interest.

If I remember later I'll take a screen shot of my Eberron book to give you an example

 

[doctorbadwolf]

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]

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]

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?