D&D (2024) Dungeons and Dragons future? Ray Winninger gives a nod to Mike Shea's proposed changes.

[GMforPowergamers]

If people aren't looking to buy a new set of books, I fail to see how WotC releasing a set of small; changes that don't inspire them to buy new books is a bad thing? Seems to me the person is getting what they want?

here is the thing... 3 new core books will cost WotC money to make, and they will (fairly) expect it to make Core Book money backk for the investment. IF they are not planing on selling it to the current players (or at least most current players) they must be hopeing the number of new players if brings in will be on par or over the amount of current players not buying it.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Man, there are going to be some disappointed folks here. Spoiler: no matter how much you want it to be the case, the 2024 "edition" isn't going to be a return to either of the previous two editions of the game.

Or substantial improvements on the existing one!

Though I did find on silver lining in stagnation: maybe this means Per Short Rest becoming Proficiency Per Day is dead.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It is one of the best reasons for me. The D&D art since the beginning of the game has inspired me more than anything else.

All the old inspiring art is still out there.

 

[Jer]

If people aren't looking to buy a new set of books, I fail to see how WotC releasing a set of small; changes that don't inspire them to buy new books is a bad thing? Seems to me the person is getting what they want?

I think folks are trained to expect editions of D&D to be major changes because every previous one has been a major change. But the publishing realities of 5e are different than the previous 4 editions. When 2e came out TSR was seeing major dropoffs in their sales and needed a boost. When 3e came out Wizards put 20+ years of game design advancements into the game all at once to get back the folks who had drifted away. I don't have the numbers, but my impression is that 4e was similar to 2e in that Wizards was seeing major dropoffs in sales and needed a boost - and needed one so quick they rushed 4e out the door before it was done.

5e just isn't in that kind of situation. In fact I strongly suspect that if it weren't for the fact that we have a 50th Anniversary coming up in 2 years there wouldn't be any talk of a revised edition at all. The timing of the anniversary is, IMO, driving this new release rather than financial realities that have driven so many others.

 

[billd91]

If the game ever hits that point - whether its now or in the future - then I could see a cycle where every decade or so a revised rulebook is published to gather together errata, cleaner explanations of existing rules, and any new rules that have been published in the interim. That's basically how Call of Cthulhu works for example and it's on its 7th edition. D&D is in a weird state where everyone expects edition changes to be huge changes to the game because of how 3rd edition brought 20+ years of game development advances into the game all at once, but it doesn't actually have to be that way.

There have been innovations brought into the CoC rules over time, in relatively small steps. If WotC gets into that mode with D&D, I could be reasonably content.
Plus books do wear out eventually if you tote them around from game session to game session. My PH is doing fine, but my Monster Manual has a substantial section that has broken out of its binding. I'll have no difficulty justifying buying a new one in 2024 as long as its compatible with the rest of my 5e kit.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

How does baseline Risk sell copies every single year without changing the rules? Or Catan? Or any other evergreen game?

yes ones that boards wear out and parts get lost... you aren't buying a game you are buying 3 books...

If we've actually moved into a world where D&D has become a real mass market game rather than the purview of a small number of hobbyists who need to be milked for their cash like cows every 10 years, that would actually be a good thing IMO.

it CAN be a good thing

The game shouldn't be changing so much that they have to force players to buy new rules every decade to "stay current" to turn a profit on the game.

but by that logic they should never have needed to... Honest question, Do you think ANY edition has improved on previous ones? If so you might find it surprising that people who joined in 3e+ would NOT have if thac0 was still a thing... and we don't know what the new Thac0 is until they show us a better way.

yes an evergreen game sounds good in theory, but think how stagnant that is... no growth no change?

If they're able to reach a point where they can get a consistent profit from new players aging into the game combined with people having to replace books periodically, then that's actually an astonishingly good thing for D&D as a game and for Wizards as a company. Even if there are a lot of folks who wish that D&D had settled into being that kind of game at some different point in its development history.

TSR thought so too.

If the game ever hits that point - whether its now or in the future - then I could see a cycle where every decade or so a revised rulebook is published to gather together errata, cleaner explanations of existing rules, and any new rules that have been published in the interim. That's basically how Call of Cthulhu works for example and it's on its 7th edition. D&D is in a weird state where everyone expects edition changes to be huge changes to the game because of how 3rd edition brought 20+ years of game development advances into the game all at once, but it doesn't actually have to be that way.

yes and no... WotC totally changed it... but basic 1e and 2e have as much in common as any 2 editions of Call of Cthulhu...

Also - and I think this gets underestimated - tying themselves to DDB means that any major changes to the game have to be supported by DDB or else they lose all of that work the same way they basically threw away all of the 4e tools when 5e came out. When they bought DDB that was another mark to me that they were planning on the core of the game being pretty stable long term because if they were thinking about making big changes, the DDB purchase would have been a bad move on their part.

 

[overgeeked]

You know which other company assumed indefinite growth?

All of them. Capitalism is predicated on infinite growth.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

There have been innovations brought into the CoC rules over time, in relatively small steps. If WotC gets into that mode with D&D, I could be reasonably content.
Plus books do wear out eventually if you tote them around from game session to game session. My PH is doing fine, but my Monster Manual has a substantial section that has broken out of its binding. I'll have no difficulty justifying buying a new one in 2024 as long as its compatible with the rest of my 5e kit.

yeah... books wear out... but not digital info

 

[overgeeked]

I'm not a huge fan of tricking the players into thinking something is challenging when it isn't.

No wonder you dislike 5E.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

All of them. Capitalism is predicated on infinite growth.

please can we not go into this sort of thing... this thread is already in danger of falling into edition waring no need to add real life drama