D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

[mamba]

That's quite the non sequitur you've got going there. A truly bad game is unlikely to be successful

agreed, a truly bad game is also unlikely to be popular however, so that already ensures that the result will not be truly bad

The point I was trying to make is that the playtest looks for popularity, not good design (however you want to measure that apart from popularity…). Good design is only a factor in so far as it is needed to not fall below the popularity threshold

 

[mamba]

This is 100% what the fandom demanded though. WotC is not allowed to develop stuff independently because then they are “out of touch “ with fandom.

who demanded this? to me this is self imposed more than externally dictated.

With 4e they realized the completely missed the boat / have no idea what their players actually want and then wanted to make sure that never happens again

You want WotC to be creative? Stop burying them any time they step a toe out of line.

I am more complaining that they did not go far enough with 2024… there is no ‘the fandom’

 

[soviet]

With 4e they realized the completely missed the boat / have no idea what their players actually want and then wanted to make sure that never happens again

Lots of 'their players' really liked 4e.

 

[mamba]

Lots of 'their players' really liked 4e.

a lot less than any other edition…

 

[soviet]

a lot less than any other edition…

No they said at the time it outsold all previous editions

 

[tetrasodium]

who demanded this? to me this is self imposed more than externally dictated.

With 4e they realized the completely missed the boat / have no idea what their players actually want and then wanted to make sure that never happens again


I am more complaining that they did not go far enough with 2024… there is no ‘the fandom’

Well the trouble with that bolded bit is that they made 5e hoping to recover the players they hemorrhaged into pathfinder & such by asking a group that consisted mostly of 4e players & a smattering of 3.x/PF players willing to glance away fromthose over at a next playtest but went with a simple31%l kills stuff. That self imposed hard line did fail stats101 levels of adjusting the weighting to account for the fact that wotc was hoping to lure back players who were almost certain to be respondents. You can see the same kind of kneejerk reaction where one youtuber could singlehandedly have contributed a veto block on the long rest warlock(packet6?) based on the likes from a single kneejerk video

 

[Oofta]

agreed, a truly bad game is also unlikely to be popular however, so that already ensures that the result will not be truly bad

The point I was trying to make is that the playtest looks for popularity, not good design (however you want to measure that apart from popularity…). Good design is only a factor in so far as it is needed to not fall below the popularity threshold

Good design for a game is a design that is enjoyable for the target audience. It's kind of like physics in a way, string theory has elegant math that's really cool but it keeps failing at just about every prediction and a lot of people think it's just a bad theory. Elegant design doesn't always have a good result.

I judge game rules on whether I, and the people I play with, enjoy the game. For D&D, we do. No game can be for everyone, just like you can't decide for me and the few dozen people I've played with over the past decade whether 5E is a good game.

 

[mamba]

No they said at the time it outsold all previous editions

no, it did so for the first months, in total it sold the least

 

[mamba]

Good design for a game is a design that is enjoyable for the target audience

well, then good design and popularity are the same… I am not necessarily disagreeing with that, we started down this road when I wrote that popularity is important to WotC and that is why we have playtests when someone implied that popularity cannot be important if Crawford(?) did not mention it in the interview

 

[Jaeger]

The point I was trying to make is that the playtest looks for popularity, not good design (however you want to measure that apart from popularity…). Good design is only a factor in so far as it is needed to not fall below the popularity threshold

Agreed.

"Good" is only a consideration insomuch that the game meets a threshold of "Good Enough".

So long as the game mechanics are Good Enough to not lose its current popularity, improvement in terms of 'good' game design is irrelevant to the playtest goals.

No they said at the time it outsold all previous editions

Mostly due to the playerbase being bigger in general. But when it started to get outsold by the clone, that was clearly a bridge too far for Wotc...