D&D 5E Final playtest packet due in mid September.

[Li Shenron]

Final packet means no more major changes, but subtle changes and additions (core or not) can still make a huge difference in order to support gamestyles that currently aren't well supported yet.

5e has done many things I appreciate, and others I don't like very much but I can live with. Eventually, the main regrets I had are about ideas that they introduced at some point and which I liked, only to see them disappear later, e.g. the first implementation of fighters' expertise dice, or the early idea of having slightly different spellcasting mechanic for each class (and I personally regret the complete absence from the game of the most traditional spellcasting mechanic: vancian).

Overall, if the current game is almost the game we'll get in the books (with the promised addition of a skills module at least), I think this is a game I would like to have. Although, I still have the problem that so far it failed to attract my older 3e players, thus it might not be the game I will actually manage to play. This still makes me uncertain on whether I'll really starting buying its books or not.

However, I have to say that, I am OK with dropping any hopes on further major changes (and thus "freeze" my expectations on what gamestyles the edition will support as a whole), I am OK with the current level of balance and not worried about balancing fiddly bits perfectly, but I am still NOK with what are IMHO a few glaring design shortcomings, such as still having horrible/incomplete races for Humans, Half-Elf, Half-Orc... It doesn't matter whether they are balanced in terms of numbers, these just feel to me like unfinished works compared to the other races, and it bothers me a lot. Another issue is that of saving throws being largely Wis-Con-Dex with very few Cha-Int-Str, which may not disrupt the game but still makes me feel that the designers just didn't bother working on this (even tho they said they wanted more equality of ability scores).

The amount of half-done stuff like this that will be still left in the final books is one thing that can make a difference for me if I'm undecided about jumping on the new edition's wagon. The other critical feature that can make a difference for me is artwork, so I pray they choose a style that doesn't stray away from traditional (e.g. that they don't pick a "pulp" or "anime" style for the core book).

 

[Jester David]

Yes, but Gale Force 9 was one of the few (the only?) 3rd party producers for 4e, so that may not really count as a good example of a 'new' open-ness in 5e.

I do agree that it will probably be more of a business licensing contract and less like an Open License that allows any old schmo to create something and slap teh D&D logo onto it a la 3rd edition OGL.

GF9 does licensed products, so it's actually a 2nd Party Publisher. WotC works with them to release products Wizards desn't want to do itself.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

If I'm correct in my assumption that the biggest profit base for the D&D brand is not in the RPG itself, but in ancillary products like videogames, then an open license would be to their benefit. Not because of third party game developer supprt, but because the OGL unfetters the community to create whatever it wants, which in turn bolsters a brand.

 

[Umbran]

Two years is a long time to hold people's interest and the WotC marketing department isn't that great at the best of times. Unless you seek out information on D&D you're not likely to find it. Without new big changes to the packets and regular product D&D will slip a little lower on the radar.

And that's okay.

It takes a long time to build an RPG, even longer if you try to take customer feedback. I am not surprised the effort's taking on the order of years. But, the idea that they should somehow keep your solid personal attention for all that time is flawed. From a marketing perspective, it is unnecessary. Downright counter-productive, honestly, as it is easy to burn out enthusiasm if you try to drive it too hard. The market in aggregate ought to have their eye on developments, but not each individual. They probably would prefer most individuals to come and go a bit. Just so long as they come back for news often enough that they can be caught up in the late-stage marketing push, WotC's marketing objectives are probably met.

Basically, your attention right now isn't really material for them. Your attention when they start selling books is. Any pattern that has your attention at that time will serve.

 

[Jester David]

And that's okay.

It takes a long time to build an RPG, even longer if you try to take customer feedback. I am not surprised the effort's taking on the order of years. But, the idea that they should somehow keep your solid personal attention for all that time is flawed. From a marketing perspective, it is unnecessary. Downright counter-productive, honestly, as it is easy to burn out enthusiasm if you try to drive it too hard. The market in aggregate ought to have their eye on developments, but not each individual. They probably would prefer most individuals to come and go a bit. Just so long as they come back for news often enough that they can be caught up in the late-stage marketing push, WotC's marketing objectives are probably met.

Basically, your attention right now isn't really material for them. Your attention when they start selling books is. Any pattern that has your attention at that time will serve.

Which is true for many products when you can just drop everything else and consume. It doesn't matter what other movies I'm watching or buying before Avengers 2 comes out because they have been consumed and are over.

Less so for RPGs. Playing an RPG is time consuming. Getting a group together twice a month is a commitment. And you might spend three or four sessions trying a new RPG, more if you enjoy the game or campaign. So every new big name RPG introduced might draw the player base away for 2-4 months.
And right now there's lots. There's oh so many. Not just PDFs but Kickstarters, fueling the creation of games. 13th Age. Numeria. Shadow of Esteren. Red Aegis. The World of Darkness.
Plus all the ones published by rival publishers, like Shadowrun, Iron Kingdoms, or Star Wars. And many of the new games tap right into the core audience, or are written by former WotC staff. 13th Age, Numeria, Red Aegis, and Dungeon World are all aimed right for subsets of D&D players.

Once a group is involved in a campaign, it will be hard to pull them away. Groups have already had a year to wrap up existing campaigns and start new ones. And after so many people were burned by 4e I can see a large percentage holding back until reviews come in and the internet nerd gestalt gives their collective opinion.

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

I can totally see 5e being a big hit right out of the gate because so many people will want to see how well it does on its own as well as how "compatible" it might be with previous editions mechanics and play styles and a lot of players will compare it to Pathfinder and 13th Age so at first 5e will probably sell very well and WotC will think that that is a sign that they designed a good game but that's not going to determine if they did or not. Time will tell that story.

 

[MortalPlague]

Also, it would be a good idea if they have a final beta before going to print.

This. One of the best things about a public playtest is having so many sets of eyes scrutinizing the work, and so many people trying to break the system. How often do we find a game-breaking oversight immediately after the game is released?

 

[Li Shenron]

This. One of the best things about a public playtest is having so many sets of eyes scrutinizing the work, and so many people trying to break the system. How often do we find a game-breaking oversight immediately after the game is released?

I am skeptic that they would do this publicly on a large scale, but at least I hope they will do it internally.

They should really consider giving out the final version of the game to ~1000 playtesters, for example their previous "internal playtesting groups" plus additional ones (e.g. delegate some of this work to FLGS under NDA if needed, or give the beta to those who preorder the final product), at least to minimize errata, inconsistencies and glaring mistakes in the written text.

Fixing balance might be already too late at that point, and require information fusion. Some different groups may report conflicting opinions on balance, but spotting & fixing errata before going to print should be much easier, it will be inexpensive (professional proofreaders required to be paid, D&D fans would gladly do it for free for the privilege of a sneak peak into the final product) and will improve the final product.

 

[Warunsun]

...or give the beta to those who preorder the final product), at least to minimize errata, inconsistencies and glaring mistakes in the written text.

That would be a great idea but it is just impossible with Wizards of the Coast. They don't operate that way. Even to sell their special GenCon module they had to lean on forces outside of the company. I would also be highly surprised if fifth edition is sold in PDF format before the release of the sixth edition. Its called D&DClassics.com for a reason.

 

[Hussar]

I can totally see 5e being a big hit right out of the gate because so many people will want to see how well it does on its own as well as how "compatible" it might be with previous editions mechanics and play styles and a lot of players will compare it to Pathfinder and 13th Age so at first 5e will probably sell very well and WotC will think that that is a sign that they designed a good game but that's not going to determine if they did or not. Time will tell that story.

This is a totally fair point. Within a few months of 4e's release, 4e was a pretty strong success. Several reprints of the core books - five? Six? Can't remember now. But, in any case, a pretty darn strong showing.

Granted it went wahoonie shaped after that, so, yeah, time will tell is very important.