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

[CleverNickName]

I disagree. I would reverse that and say it is only option if it is in the PHB. As you noted, so few even realize optional rules are in the DMG.

Maybe it's an issue of perception. Maybe the book itself implies who will be the one to decide the rules within are included. If the players get to decide which rules are used and which ones aren't (by not choosing feats for their characters, or not choosing to play a variant human, etc.), then I'd expect all optional rules to be printed in the Player's Handbook. But they're not.

And if the DM is the one who decides which rules are included and which ones aren't, then those rules should be printed in the Dungeon Master's Guide, then I'd expect all optional rules to be printed in the Dungeon Master's Guide. But they're not.

Instead, we currently have some optional rules in the PHB and others in the DMG, and it causes a lot of unnecessary conflict at my table. The players aren't informed about which "options" are actually options, and the DM--that's me!--has to endure a lot of push-back and arguments from the players whenever he wants to add stuff from the DMG (or remove stuff from the PHB).

All I ask is that they make a clear distinction. Whether they are in the Dungeon Master's Guide or the Player's Handbook, I hope they put them in their own chapter named "Optional Rules: Check With Your DM First!" I think it would make things a lot easier, especially for newcomers to the game. Having them sprinkled around in several places, and in different books, isn't as helpful as it could be.

 

[Reynard]

So here's a thought: I think accessibility is going to be a goal. Separately, we have seen WotC hire based on the goal of inclusivity. Is it possible that WotC would hire some of the teams-- such as the Old School Essentials folks, but also others -- that have shown real talent in thinking outside the "walls of text" visual design box that has dominated most of the industry for 40 years? That would be pretty cool. They could not change a single rule and trim the books to half length of referencable, readable text and I'd buy new copies.

Of course some folks would scream "money grab" if they dared reduce word count, no matter how necessary.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So here's a thought: I think accessibility is going to be a goal. Separately, we have seen WotC hire based on the goal of inclusivity. Is it possible that WotC would hire some of the teams-- such as the Old School Essentials folks, but also others -- that have shown real talent in thinking outside the "walls of text" visual design box that has dominated most of the industry for 40 years? That would be pretty cool. They could not change a single rule and trim the books to half length of referencable, readable text and I'd buy new copies.

Of course some folks would scream "money grab" if they dared reduce word count, no matter how necessary.

In what way is it necessary to reduce word count?

Changing the format of the books to the degree you describe would be extremely jarring not only to veteran players, but also all the newer players that have purchased the core books over the last few years. About the only people it would potentially serve are 4e fans and people who might, in the future, buy D&D books, but don't own any now.

 

[Reynard]

In what way is it necessary to reduce word count?

Changing the format of the books to the degree you describe would be extremely jarring not only to veteran players, but also all the newer players that have purchased the core books over the last few years. About the only people it would potentially serve are 4e fans and people who might, in the future, buy D&D books, but don't own any now.

Game books are manuals. They need to be referenced as such.

If it were up to me, each D&D rulebook or adventure would come in a slipcase. There would be a big robust hardcover with all that juicy, lovely prose, but the other book would be a reference manual that had far more in common with a complex board game rulebook.

Just an aside so it's clear where I'm coming from: I am an RPG freelance writer that gets paid by the word. I get why RPG books look the way they do. But thay are by and large terrible for reference. Runing a Paizo AP or big WotC 5E adventure is a nightmare of preparation. Important details are buried in walls of text and no one gives any thought to infographic design.

 

[Haplo781]

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.

I'd settle for previous editions being covered by the current OGL.

 

[Reynard]

I'd settle for previous editions being covered by the current OGL.

That's not a problem. The oldest editions have all been retrocloned and I am pretty sure there is a 4E retroclone out there too.

 

[Charlaquin]

My point is that with the right visual design,you don't have to "dig."

Source: 20-odd years of marriage to a graphic designer.

Maybe. There are a lot of feats to go over though. Even if they’re easy to sort through, it’s still a lot of mental effort to compare and make the decision of which one you want.

 

[CleverNickName]

I'd settle for previous editions being covered by the current OGL.

I'm not a lawyer, so I really have no idea...but isn't the D20 Open Gaming License still valid? Publishers can still use it to publish 3rd Edition-compatible materials, right?

 

[Haplo781]

That's not a problem. The oldest editions have all been retrocloned and I am pretty sure there is a 4E retroclone out there too.

WotC doesn't make money off retroclones, and the player base is much smaller than something that you can get new DM's Guild content for.

Also, no, there is no functional 4e retroclones thanks to the godawful GSL.

 

[Reynard]

WotC doesn't make money off retroclones, and the player base is much smaller than something that you can get new DM's Guild content for.

Also, no, there is no functional 4e retroclones thanks to the godawful GSL.

What does wotc have to do with it? The whole point of the OGL is that they aren't involved.

Also, check out Lancer. It isn't quite a 4e retroclone, but it's not not either.