D&D 5E Does 5E avoid the overloads of previous editions?

[ForeverSlayer]

I would like to see the focus be on good adventures/adventure paths.

I would rather Paizo take care of those.

 

[Mistwell]

No, about a revision every year.

You appear to be confused about what he said.

Some people on the internet (fans, like you and me) speculated about that. There is no evidence at all to support it. It's purely conjecture.

 

[Mistwell]

More like 3 partial cases really. We've got no record of creative/game management layoffs before the release of 3e, but we have a bunch right after.
We've got a pause during the development of 4, then resumption of layoffs.
We've got a pause during development of 5 - is another resumption on the way?

No, we have one pause. The one pause was between 3e and 4e. They "paused" the layoffs DURING 4e. There is one example, and only one example, of a pause starting between editions.

Indeed, if you want a more likely actual trend, we have a trend of them not laying people off like that anymore. For many years now. During an edition, and during a pause, they've regularly not done such layoffs.

Now that doesn't mean they won't do a layoff again, but right now there is more of a trend to not layoff, than there is of layoffs which pause and then resume. Because you cannot make a trend of one.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Is he serious that posters on the internet have speculated about a negative thing without any evidence to support it? Yes, he is serious, people on the internet have speculated about it.

Why a negative thing? It works fine for MtG. New series are released but players can keep playing with their older cards. Of course you can set up official organized play to require the latest hotness (like they have already done with Essentials)and keep a steady stream of new content and brand "events" streaming in the twitterverse.

More money....more money...more money.

 

[Ichneumon]

There has been some speculation that there might be a revision overload, i.e. a new revision of the rules every year, each re-release tied to a new story arc. "Tyranny of Dragons" in 2014, "Menace of the Undead" in 2015, "Threat of the Goblinoids" in 2016... each time revising and updating all the rules.

Which by the way, is the last thing I want from a RPG. I am not going to buy it again every year in order to "keep up" with the player base. I only buy each edition once, or none at all. At least this will be clear at the first release anyway.

Speculating that there may be future story-arc products after Tyranny of Dragons that can be played standalone is not a stupid assumption. In such products, the embedded rules may be tweaked slightly between each one to accommodate the adventure content.

But assumptions that we're getting D&D 5.1, 5.2... are way off base.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I'd say the best suspects right now are "adventure bloat" (they've got adventures out for the game NOW, and the thing ain't even out yet!) and "campaign option bloat" (given modularity) and possibly general "book bloat" (if they go OGL again).

But complaints against bloat have always struck me as a particular 1st world OCD kind of complaint. "Waaaah, I have too much delicious food and not enough room in my belly and I need to use the vomitorium.", "Boo hoo boo hoo I have too much money and no worthy investments that will give me more.", "Oh no, my favorite pass time is giving me too much to do with it, this is the worst possible scenario!"

It's not a problem if all you're worried about is what you're going to do in your home game next weekend.

We'll see if the practice reasserts itself. It usually lies dormant in years they are gearing up for a new edition release and then comes a-calling once that release is out the door. Things were quiet between about 2005 and the release of 4e then the budget trimming scissors came out late 2008 and ran through 2011. Now, things are relatively quiet again, but as soon as 5e is out the door, I (sadly) expect 2014 to end with layoffs again.

I guess "employee bloat" isn't something we expect 5e to have.

I would be a bit surprised if there AREN'T layoffs later this year form WotC -- new editions require a bigger team than sustaining editions do. If I was Mike, I wouldn't plan on being at WotC in 2016. But this is the model of employment these days. If you have the same job for more than 2 years, someone somewhere is probably doing something wrong.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

So if the claim is "They do 1-2 layoffs each year", and it's been at least 2 years since it happens...we can conclude layoffs do not happen 1-2 times each year. (snip)

Um, yeah... and that's because...

We'll see if the practice reasserts itself. It usually lies dormant in years they are gearing up for a new edition release and then comes a-calling once that release is out the door. Things were quiet between about 2005 and the release of 4e then the budget trimming scissors came out late 2008 and ran through 2011. Now, things are relatively quiet again, but as soon as 5e is out the door, I (sadly) expect 2014 to end with layoffs again.

In addition, there were a couple of resignations - Bruce Cordell, John Schindehette - that may have counted toward the normal "budget" of retrenchments. Or no.

(snip) To be clear, you said they had a strategy to lay people off once or twice a year. And then you said they have not followed that strategy for at least two years. And now you are saying they have not demonstrated an ability to delivery on a different strategy.

I think it's pretty clear you understand they do deliver on different strategies, as in your own words they did just that. (snip)

Ahhh, I do understand your "pulling teeth" comment with which you ended your reply. You really are pulling teeth here.

It's a not uncommon strategy in US corporates, in particular, to have regular culling of staff which may or may not be performance based. What was the rule at GE before? The bottom 10% had to be removed every year even if they had achieved their goals.

(snip) You mean the strategy interrupted by a murder suicide and locked code? That one? That's what leads you to believe that they cannot change their plan for what products to sell? (snip)

Mismanaged.

How does one key software project suddenly depend on a single individual? What level of gross mismanagement allowed that to happen?

(snip) And you can't. You don't get to just fiat over what others are saying here - I think your assumption is bunk, and I think you pretending it's a certainty when it's not, is also bunk. You can decide to not answer that, but you cannot pretend "My assumption is correct so let's all just talk about that" is itself a valid strategy (snip)

Mate, I'm not that mod who can freely pontificate and issue opinions by fiat. I explained what I though and why, and also why I could be wrong. Lighten up; it's only a game and this is only the internet.

(snip) Damn, it's like pulling teeth in here sometimes.

So relax and stop pulling teeth. If my posts are really causing your tension level to rise so much, I am more than happy to exit the thread.

 

[Lanefan]

I'd say the best suspects right now are "adventure bloat" ...

This would be wonderful! Unless this ...

I would rather Paizo take care of those.

... happens, as Paizo's adventure modules always have way too much baked-in backstory for my liking; and it just gets in the way. Just give me the map, location requirements, and room descriptions and let me worry about the backstory, if any.

Lanefan

 

[TarionzCousin]

I would like to see the focus be on good adventures/adventure paths.

I would rather see WoTc churn out setting related books instead of splat books.

Both of these sound good to me.

But complaints against bloat have always struck me as a particular 1st world OCD kind of complaint. "Waaaah, I have too much delicious food and not enough room in my belly and I need to use the vomitorium."

This is somehow both hilarious and on point. Kudos, sir.

You must spread XP before Kamikaze Midget blah blah blah...,

 

[CM]

Give me lots of crunch-light mini-setting books like the Neverwinter campaign guide. God, that thing is fabulous.