WotC How much does Hasbro / WotC impact your feelings towards D&D?

[Corinnguard]

I was cool, then I was hot, then I was cool again, and then I was dope, but then I was lit.

Your comment made me think of a certain Katy Perry song. Hot N Cold


Are you trying to give me an ear wyrm?

 

[Neonchameleon]

At least the D&D team in 2024 are in a better place than they were in 2014. They aren't putting thanks to the RPG Pundit and Zak S into the credits - and 2024 isn't nearly as half-assed as 2014 with e.g. a quarter of the the Warlock invocations giving you less than an extra spells known was.

But then I'm buying this version rather than leaving it years until I can get an edition that doesn't thank the Pundit

 

[pablomaz]

Argh, I hate it, I hate it with all my strength. Big 5 for me.
Well, it could be worse, it could be in the situation Shadowrun is: owned by someone (Topps) who doesn't even know it exists, licensing it for an absolutely nightmare of a publisher (Catalyst). Every time I open a Shadowrun book I hate WotC a little less...

 

[payn]

Argh, I hate it, I hate it with all my strength. Big 5 for me.
Well, it could be worse, it could be in the situation Shadowrun is: owned by someone (Topps) who doesn't even know it exists, licensing it for an absolutely nightmare of a publisher (Catalyst). Every time I open a Shadowrun book I hate WotC a little less...

I don’t know what the shadowrun books are like but if they are anything like Battletech I understand exactly what you are saying.

 

[Scribe]

I don’t know what the shadowrun books are like but if they are anything like Battletech I understand exactly what you are saying.

I will likely go to my grave lamenting Battletech as a massive missed opportunity.

 

[payn]

I will likely go to my grave lamenting Battletech as a massive missed opportunity.

It’s enjoying a massive resurgence right now. The reference books make me want to pull my hair out tho…

 

[Scribe]

It’s enjoying a massive resurgence right now. The reference books make me want to pull my hair out tho…

I've always loved it, I just have always thought it should be so much bigger than it ever has been in terms of Table Top.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

it might very well be rushed, but I would not expect a less rushed version to be drastically different, maybe better balanced, some fewer errata, stuff like that, but not a drastically different game

They would not have turned this into Shadowdark or 4e, if only they had 6 more months

Yeah I don't buy it that any deficiencies in 5.5e are due to it being rushed. They could've had an infinite amount of time and it would've turned out approximately the same.

 

[DinoInDisguise]

Yeah I don't buy it that any deficiencies in 5.5e are due to it being rushed. They could've had an infinite amount of time and it would've turned out approximately the same.

The reason for this is pretty simple. The "deficiencies" are largely subjective. So from WotC's point of view, things worked beyond their expectations from 2014 to 2024. So what incentive did they have to address any "deficiencies" as defined by people on this forum?

Some of the common complaints here are the specificity of the rules, essentially fixing the vagueness, adding more "crunch" or options, and balance. All of these are subjective, not clearly an issue, or both.

The vagueness and "crunch" aspects are the easiest to demonstrate, as those both have long discussions, recently, where even this forum was heavily divided. So at best, it's a split in the community. At worse, the larger community has a more favorable opinion of that aspect than this forum does. It is unlikely this forum leans the opposite direction, as there are many people who actively dislike 5e, and don't play it, who love to talk about their issues with the system.

And then we come to balance. Class balance is a nebulous issue. 2023 DnDbeyond usage, link below, shows that Figher, Rogue, and Barbarian top the charts. This points to either a lack of a functional balance issue, or a lack of caring by the community. But it's far from an overwhelming condemnation of the class balance. Ranger scored above Bard, Druid, and Sorcerer for instance. Funny enough, the ranger buffs in 2024 were not nearly what many hoped.

You can look at the satisfaction with classes, and get slightly different numbers. But those are in line, mostly, with the classes that saw large changes - such as the aforementioned fighter. I'd have more specifics but I don't have this data in front of me. Further muddying the picture, in the playtest votes the objectively more balanced options for Druid got voted down by large margins. Again, this just muddies the picture for WotC.

This all leads to the question than, of what deficiencies were so objectively there that WotC should fix? And what was the data that would support them finding the deficiency as real? The big one, that I could find, was CR, but they, supposedly, addressed that.

So I agree. They didn't fix many because they don't see them as deficiencies or they don't believe their core audience cares. I don't think time changes either of those.

Link: https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1648-2023-unrolled-a-look-back-at-a-year-of-adventure

 

[Daztur]

The reason for this is pretty simple. The "deficiencies" are largely subjective. So from WotC's point of view, things worked beyond their expectations from 2014 to 2024. So what incentive did they have to address any "deficiencies" as defined by people on this forum?

Some of the common complaints here are the specificity of the rules, essentially fixing the vagueness, adding more "crunch" or options, and balance. All of these are subjective, not clearly an issue, or both.

The vagueness and "crunch" aspects are the easiest to demonstrate, as those both have long discussions, recently, where even this forum was heavily divided. So at best, it's a split in the community. At worse, the larger community has a more favorable opinion of that aspect than this forum does. It is unlikely this forum leans the opposite direction, as there are many people who actively dislike 5e, and don't play it, who love to talk about their issues with the system.

And then we come to balance. Class balance is a nebulous issue. 2023 DnDbeyond usage, link below, shows that Figher, Rogue, and Barbarian top the charts. This points to either a lack of a functional balance issue, or a lack of caring by the community. But it's far from an overwhelming condemnation of the class balance. Ranger scored above Bard, Druid, and Sorcerer for instance. Funny enough, the ranger buffs in 2024 were not nearly what many hoped.

You can look at the satisfaction with classes, and get slightly different numbers. But those are in line, mostly, with the classes that saw large changes - such as the aforementioned fighter. I'd have more specifics but I don't have this data in front of me. Further muddying the picture, in the playtest votes the objectively more balanced options for Druid got voted down by large margins. Again, this just muddies the picture for WotC.

This all leads to the question than, of what deficiencies were so objectively there that WotC should fix? And what was the data that would support them finding the deficiency as real? The big one, that I could find, was CR, but they, supposedly, addressed that.

So I agree. They didn't fix many because they don't see them as deficiencies or they don't believe their core audience cares. I don't think time changes either of those.

Link: https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1648-2023-unrolled-a-look-back-at-a-year-of-adventure

Well just because some people play certain classes a lot doesn't mean those classes are balanced. I'm a real sucker for barbarian/rogue multiclass (I'm a big fan of "hold my beer" moments and nobody does those like a barbarian/rogue) and I'm never going to win an award for high DPS with those builds...A lot of people know that druids are strong but don't find them fun to play.