D&D 5E How Do You Feel About the Rate of New WotC Game Content for 5E DMs?

[Hexmage-EN]

Now that we are ten years into 5E, how are you feeling about the amount of content that has been published by WotC for use by DMs? Is there enough, too much, or too little?

 

[Parmandur]

Now that we are ten years into 5E, how are you feeling about the amount of content that has been published by WotC for use by DMs? Is there enough, too much, or too little?

Somewhere between enough and too much. I am happy with the rate, but it got pretty gnarly last year with the breakneck release schedule.

 

[Bacon Bits]

I've got no criticism for the quantity. It's the quality that I've been finding lacking.

 

[Zardnaar]

I've got no criticism for the quantity. It's the quality that I've been finding lacking.

This most of the adventures are mediocre being generous.

2016-20 was decent. GoS through to Theros. Then that Auril/cold one came out.

 

[gban007]

For me, I feel that type of quantity doesn't quite match up to what I'd like, albeit I understand why they do it they way they do.
My preference would be a bit less adventures, and a bit more lore / setting type books instead, though on that note happy to see the two forgotten realms books coming out next year.
I do miss all the forgotten realms books that came out with 3e, as I like reading lore for lore sake as well.
That is why I quite like cubicle 7 putting out all these 5 dollar bits for warhammer / wrath and glory etc- a bit of fleshing setting out with interesting lore bits and bits that can be used in a campaign if desired.
At that price point happy to pick up even if may never hit table. I would like to see some of that for 5e as well.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

I've got no criticism for the quantity. It's the quality that I've been finding lacking.

^This for me. I voted Dissatisfied but that is more about the quantity of GOOD content. I'd be fine with less books overall if it meant more high quality content that I actually cared to use

 

[Vaalingrade]

I am very upset that they tried to teach new players how to DM rather than reinforcing the playstyle I've honed on my own for two decades to the point that I don't need the same instructions about it and thus wouldn't have bought to product anyway.

But no, seriously guys: Arms and Equipment Guide. Get on it.

 

[Clint_L]

5e does not suffer from a lack of content, official or otherwise.

The only content I’m really interested in at this point is standalone, setting agnostic adventures that can be easily modified and worked into my own campaign. 1-5 game arcs. Maybe a few more setting guides in the style of Explorers Guide to Wildemount. Maybe.

I don’t need more stuff for the sake of stuff.

 

[Hussar]

Loving the rate. Have loved it since day 1. Going to go back and get Out of the Abyss for my next campaign.

 

[delericho]

Mixed.

For adventure material, the rate has been good - too many to actually use, but only a subset is of interest anyway. (And that's a good thing - the adventures that interest me won't be exactly the same ones that interest you.) Unfortunately, I've found the rate of hits to misses rather poor.

For setting material, again the rate has been good. Unfortunately, of the three I've been interested in, there's only one I've liked their new take on it (and the key to the success of that one was that they didn't change anything).

But other DM's material has been thin on the ground. Largely because they've tended to put their new rules systems within adventure and settings books, and I'm not going to buy a whole book knowing I'm not interested in 90% of it. That one could be fixed quite easily, though, either by issuing a compilation book with all those components, or by making them available separately on DM's Guild.