D&D General Kobold Press Going Down a Dark Road

[Micah Sweet]

I very much disagree with this. The whole point of them stressing out that OD&D is not a new edition and is backwards compatible is because they are very much interested in keeping this massive consumer group.
I don't know how effective they are going to be in it, but they are absolutely interested.

I believe they are doing that for all the people that have joined 5e since it became popular shortly after it was released (a large group to be sure). It is not, however, the same group of players the game was designed to attract when it was designed and originally published. That group no longer matters to them.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Do the 2014 CR system, the 2014 Monster Manual's creatures, and 5E's adventures work with the assumption that every 1st level character gets a free Feat?

Yes. Been playing that way since at least 2017.

Heck the published adventures would work just fine if you gave all PCs an uncommon magic item, as well.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

So...have I missed something? Has something suddenly changed about WotC's plans?

Because "hey guys, these books we have no control over are going out of print sooner rather than later, and we are trying to be ready for that" seems like a perfectly valid thing to have a FAQ about...

Isn't this, pretty much exactly, how Paizo courted 3.5e players in the wake of the GSL? Words are different, but the concept--"we're preserving the REAL SPIRIT of the game," "we AREN'T moving to pure digital," etc. was exactly how everyone I knew spoke about PF when it first launched.

 

[mamba]

It all depends on how you look at it. To me, it really seems like WotC has decided to stop producing 5e, and no longer has any interest in the population it was created for.

Don't equate yourself with that population. If you think WotC is not interested in keeping their audience and having it move to 1DD, and are instead creating 1DD for some new audience, then I have no idea what you are smoking.

I believe they are doing that for all the people that have joined 5e since it became popular shortly after it was released (a large group to be sure). It is not, however, the same group of players the game was designed to attract when it was designed and originally published. That group no longer matters to them.

If they lose one grognard for every 10 new players they gain, it is a worthwhile tradeoff to them

 

[UngainlyTitan]

It all depends on how you look at it. To me, it really seems like WotC has decided to stop producing 5e, and no longer has any interest in the population it was created for. It's a little sad, to be honest, even though I have other options. I used to get legitimately excited when WotC announced another book, and even that pales in comparison to what their predecessor released.

Heck, I still hold a torch for Dragon Magazine!

As a member of the population it was created for, I object to this statement. I quite like the direction the game is going in. The population it was "designed for" was a broad church and remains so. This is a game where new features and mechanics get to go through a popularity contest before adoption.
I get it that is not going the direction you favour but them the breaks I guess.

 

[mamba]

My impression of this whole thing is that KP had a really strong reason to do black flag, and the community was really behind them. Then the reason evaporated with the creative commons move. Now they are trying to find a new narrative to keep people engaged.

That is my take as well. One good thing in my book is that Black Flag will be on all kinds of VTTs, while for 1DD I am not so sure about the future support. Heck, it already supports fewer than BF will from the start (according to the announcement). Presumably it will also include more of the class related stuff in its licensed material, which is another plus in my book, if maybe not one that is all that marketable.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Don't equate yourself with that population. If you think WotC is not interested in keeping their audience and having it move to 1DD, and are instead creating 1DD for some new audience, then I have no idea what you are smoking.


If they lose one grognard for every 10 new players they gain, it is a worthwhile tradeoff to them

First of all, I am absolutely part of that population. I had given up on 4e years before, and 5e brought me back. That's the definition of 5e's original audience.

They would like to keep their entire audience, sure, but they only really care about all the new adds when 5e became popular, and all the theoretical players that might start buying their products in the future. The people for which they actually wrote the game to entice back to D&D are the ones I'm saying they no longer are interested in particularly.

Is that the ratio? 10 : 1? That is supposition at best.

 

[Micah Sweet]

As a member of the population it was created for, I object to this statement. I quite like the direction the game is going in. The population it was "designed for" was a broad church and remains so. This is a game where new features and mechanics get to go through a popularity contest before adoption.
I get it that is not going the direction you favour but them the breaks I guess.

There are always exceptions to any trend, and people always trot them out to refute a point.

 

[Alzrius]

If they lose one grognard for every 10 new players they gain, it is a worthwhile tradeoff to them

Grognards, by their very nature, have stuck with the game for decades, and quite likely have bought a significant portion of the offerings being put out during that time and/or brought many other people into the hobby who themselves became consumers, at least for a time. Grognards are, in other words, the vital few.

I wonder how many of those new players will show the same level of dedication when D&D's current cultural apogee inevitably wanes?

 

[mamba]

First of all, I am absolutely part of that population

Yes you are, never said otherwise. But you are one in a diverse group, not a representative of the entire group. So if WotC does something 80% like, 15% don't care and you find yourself in the 5% then they still act in the interest of that population, even if it is not in yours.

Is that the ratio? 10 : 1? That is supposition at best.

No idea, I personally think that ratio is very generous to you