D&D 5E I think the era of 4th edition Dungeons and Dragons had it right. (not talking about the rules).

[Xeviat]

Why didn't you just limit it?

I think you're misunderstanding the problem. The problem wasn't that there was too much content, but that I didn't have the time to use it all. So I did enjoy reading it, but it made me wish I had more time.

 

[delericho]

- Online magazine:

Eh. I miss the print magazines. The digital versions, not so much.

And, unfortunately, once Dragon #360 and Dungeon #151 didn't appear in stores, it was already too late for them to come back.

- Character builder:

Yeah. Like electronic versions of the books, this is just something D&D should have. It doesn't need to be in-house, but in that case there should be a licensed tool out there.

- In house VTT:

Nah. WotC don't have a good record on software, so I think they've done the right thing in licensing this out.

- Content:

Sort of agree. There are particular bits of content that I really want to see, but I'm not exactly sorry not to see the glut from 4e (or 3e) days. (Of course, the problem is that if you take my "particular bits of content" and your "particular bits of content", and that guy's "particular bits of content", and so on across the however-many millions of D&D players, you're right back to the glut.)

But, in any case, I could stand to see a bit more - and certainly wouldn't be averse to sacrificing one of the annual storylines in order to see it.

 

[Savevsdeath]

Still bored by the nonexistent release schedule of 5E. I don't need fluff, but i do need content that a DM will actually let me use at their table because it has the official WotC seal of approval. I don't get that from fluff, and I can make my own fluff. And all the fan-made mechanical content is useless to me except in the game I personally run for that very reason. As a player, it's PHB + EEPC + SCAG (if i'm lucky) or i don't play. Which really sucks, because those books don't accomodate everything i want to play, or even a fraction of the things I want to play. I still want an official Warlord that isn't a kludge. I still want something like my sticky, spiked ball of 'you aren't going anywhere' fighter to be possible. I want mechanics that work with my imagination, and not against it. And my imagination is pretty epic, so the piddly low-fantasy Game of Thrones offerings WotC is doling out a teaspoon at a time isn't doing it. I have no fantasy game left - D&D went from epic to dull, Exalted is a train wreck, and 13th Age doesn't have enough of a following to gain any traction and make games easy to find. Right now, I do not have a fantasy game that fits my needs. It doesn't exist, and soon I won't be playing tabletop rpg's at all because someone decided that my desires as a gamer mean nothing because i'm 'a minority'.

So yeah, I feel you, OP. Boring, predictable, slow edition = happy grognards, though. I'm sure someone will make a tabletop RPG for those of us who actually liked 4E, want actual mechanics that can do things other than bog-standard low fantasy, and are willing to pay for it. But it won't be WotC.

 

[delericho]

I have no fantasy game left - D&D went from epic to dull... Right now, I do not have a fantasy game that fits my needs. It doesn't exist...

Any reason you can't continue playing 4e?

 

[Creamsteak]

I had plenty of fun with 4e, but what I enjoyed about it was the combat. It had somewhat interesting combat options and was, in my opinion, pretty good at the light tactical miniatures combat game. My biggest gripes were that it was so "balanced" in certain ways as to be kinda repetitive. 9th level, 19th level, and 29th level didn't feel that incredibly different to me. Maybe the trolls go from solos to standards to minions, and my numbers are bigger, but it had it felt about the same. Interestingly in video game design a LOT of games are moving in this direction, basically standardize a scaling so you never truly "run out" of content, but I think something great about RPGs is missed with that.

I still like hero lab for character building. If you go download 5e and then the community sourced pack it works quite well from my limited testing. 5e is not anywhere near as complicated as Pathfinder has gotten over time, so it's well within reach.

I think 5e releasing an official roll 20 version of their module is a great move towards something interesting.

I will say I wish they'd make at least one crunch book a year of some sort.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I have a hard time viewing the slower approach of 5E as being the more commercially driven approach when compared to the splatbook a month of 4E. That logic just blows my mind.

 

[Blue]

I am actively against a offical WotC character builder. Because it would lock out all 3rd party content like it did back in the 4e days. It would also likely not support house rules, like "everyone gets a feat at 1st".

For me, there were two main reasons 4e needed it. First, there was so much content released in so many different books and magazines that you needed it compiled all in one place. And second because having a clean way to print out all those separate powers (especially once you hit paragon) was a big aid to not delaying the game at the table. Neither of these hold true for 5e at the current point.

There are plenty of VTT out there, including ones with official support and the modules like Fantasy Grounds, and great free alternatives like Roll20. I don't see a need to compete with those just to have an in-house tool.

With the advent of the internet, I have a lot more options for content then I did back when I was an avid reader of the magazines. (I started collecting Dragon before issue 50.) I'm not opposed to it if they could produce it at a profit without taking resources away from other things, but right now between various blogs and forums and the free UA and Sage Advice articles it would really have to blow me away to interest me in subscribing. In some ways, DM's Guild is al la cart magazine, but without their overhead for hiring writers, editing, etc.

 

[JeffB]

Disclaimer- have only read OP and first couple of comments- so taking the OP as the main gist of conversation and not focusing on the business aspect..


As a consumer I feel they have taken a step forward and two steps back in content and the rules with 5e.

I think the big problem as I have grown older, I either want some fresh and new with D&D like 4e was , or I want something that embraces the editions I grew up playing...namely the lbbs, very early AD&D and moldvay/cook/marsh. So I have DW, 13A and 4e to scratch that modern itch, and I have a multitude of OSR and original products as well. Having WOTC re-hash yet again the same mass of fluff material from 1983- 2006 is tiresome.

IOW- This "vanilla D&D" as I term 5e is unsatisfying for me from a fluff and rules perspective. It plays well, but there is nothing they are doing with the game that makes me want to run it.. This new method of support...gigantic pre made stories from Perkins, and the types of products I see on DMs Guild, is a total snoozefest.The OSR has a much better grasp on producing adventures and utilities. 4e support was not without it's quality issues (horrible first round of adventures- with hyper focus on combat encounters), but I vastly prefer products like the Digital tools , Vor-Rukoth, Hammerfast, Open Grave, and Threats to the Netir Vale to anything they are producing today. I don't want my D&D fix from video games, designer/author interviews on a phone app, bad movies, and watching a bunch of other people play the game online.

So to the OP, I would say, like me, you are no longer their type of consumer. Make way for the WOTC branding iron ... :sizzle:

 

[delericho]

I have a hard time viewing the slower approach of 5E as being the more commercially driven approach when compared to the splatbook a month of 4E. That logic just blows my mind.

And yet it is. The thing is that making all those books also costs money, so if the sales per book weren't good then they probably weren't doing terribly well. (And DDI didn't help either - they probably had exactly the wrong number of subscribers, in that they canibalised book sales enough to really hurt, but also didn't have quite enough subscribers to make up the difference.)

Conversely, 5e has very few titles but many many more sales per book. Plus, the above-inflation price increase with this edition means that they're also making more profit with each copy sold.

They've managed to hit on a sales strategy to make D&D wildly profitable again, and good for them. Long may it continue.

 

[hawkeyefan]

And yet it is. The thing is that making all those books also costs money, so if the sales per book weren't good then they probably weren't doing terribly well. (And DDI didn't help either - they probably had exactly the wrong number of subscribers, in that they canibalised book sales enough to really hurt, but also didn't have quite enough subscribers to make up the difference.)

Conversely, 5e has very few titles but many many more sales per book. Plus, the above-inflation price increase with this edition means that they're also making more profit with each copy sold.

They've managed to hit on a sales strategy to make D&D wildly profitable again, and good for them. Long may it continue.

Well it is certainly the more sound production strategy, that seems true.

I suppose I meant which one seems more "let's wrong every last dollar we can from them". I mean, with 5E, you have the three core rule books as always, although the basic rules being available for free can influence how required they are. But I had a buddy who stuck with 4E far longer than I did, and he was buying almost all the books as they came out...and eventually it got to the point where large portions of the early books were pretty much rendered moot by later releases.

4E certainly seemed more predatory in that sense. Endless releases, subscription based services...all designed to keep people spending money. I don't think the fact that it largely failed and that the next edition went out of its way to avoid the same pitfalls forgives it.