D&D 5E Light release schedule: More harm than good?

[HobbitFan]

The slow release schedule isn't a problem in and of itself.
In light of WOTC also being uncommunicative and their 4E history....I can see why some people are raising doubts.

They don't have to start pumping out products on a monthly basis to succeed.
They DO have to start talking to the community, escpecially if they are going to be experimenting with how the game is presented and delivered.

So far they haven't done much taliking about what they are doing and want to do.
And they haven't done anything about managing expectations either. If the "consumptive" model of game support is going away, the public needs to know what it's going to be replaced with. The community has gotten used to certain things and a certain way of doing things. If you make changes you have to educate the public or yo run the risk of 4E level disconnect eventually.

That they follow up the good communication of the playtest period with this stonewall activity is perplexing....
and they haven't done anything but the bare minimum with their website.

 

[Shasarak]

Sorry, I'm not familiar with the term - I assume it's referencing how gnomes weren't in 4E's PHB 1? (Correct me if I'm wrong!)

If so, I don't think it applies to 5E - this edition's PHB covers a lot of ground, with nothing obvious missing.

(For the last four editions psionics have been non-core, added on in supplements down the line; and while there is no "Warlord" class the official Wizards party line is that that is represented well enough in 5E by the Battlemaster so I don't expect to see a Warlord class appearing in supplements down the road.)

"The gnome effect" as I'm understanding it would only really apply to obvious absences from the core material, and I've not seen any of those. I'd like to see more sub-classes and spells and magic items as much as everyone else, but 5E is very "complete" as it stands right now.

It is a very subjective opinion. For me it is not having the Warforged in the game but perhaps for someone else it is not having the Warlord, or Kobold or Psionics or Birthright or whatever their own personal "Gnome" is.

So one persons "very complete" is another persons "horribly lacking in options".

And that is of course not forgetting the fact that it is easier for a person who does not want "bloat" to ignore options then it is for a person who wants options to make it themselves.

 

[Gecko85]

It is a very subjective opinion. For me it is not having the Warforged in the game but perhaps for someone else it is not having the Warlord, or Kobold or Psionics or Birthright or whatever their own personal "Gnome" is.

So one persons "very complete" is another persons "horribly lacking in options".

And that is of course not forgetting the fact that it is easier for a person who does not want "bloat" to ignore options then it is for a person who wants options to make it themselves.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?2272-Warforged-Coming-to-D-D-Soon!#.VMLjxWTF_OQ

 

[Shasarak]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?2272-Warforged-Coming-to-D-D-Soon!#.VMLjxWTF_OQ

And that is great news for me and on the other hand I also know that the Warforged was supposed to be released in the DMG too so I am not exactly expecting a release in time for my Thursday game.

 

[Kramodlog]

Reasonably confident you don't work at WotC and thus you aren't privy to the same level of information that they are. You've got the same general ignorance the rest of us got.

They don't need to know everything, they just need to know more than random people on the internet, and I'm reasonably confident that they do.

Yeah, I'll take their information and direct investment in the outcome over your "knack" and vague, nonspecific "skills" any day. But I tend to trust people with demonstrable expertise. Call it a bias.

They knew more and had more expertise when they made 4e. It doesn't mean they made the right choices and that it was a financial success and it doesn't mean they are making the right ones here. And right now, it doesn't look like it.

A lot of random people on the internet didn't see a long future for 4e either. And they were right. Maybe it was just luck or maybe some people have the smarts and the distance to see paterns others can't.

Mystery!

 

[CM]

I'm not too concerned at the release schedule at the moment. The DMG just came out, for cryin' out loud. Eventually I would like to see 1-2 expansion books per year, with things of interest for both DMs and players. Sort of like 4e's various Heroes of X books, although a central theme to each wouldn't strictly be necessary.

Also, Sailor Moon/Foreverslayer, are you still primarily looking for WotC to produce setting-related books and not splatbooks? Your earlier posts in this thread indicate that was not the case.

 

[Kramodlog]

In the space of logic that makes up the entirety of intellectual property law and the space of logic that makes up the majority of regular property law. And both of those are based on legal concepts going back thousands of years.

So, in other words, the space of logic that exists in the very concept of ownership. And the space of logic that makes the work of people like Morrus or WotC possible to begin with.

Your missing Sailor Moon's (I can't believe I said that) point. Being the owner of something doesn't ou are always right. An owner can make mistakes. People at WotC and TSR have made many mistakes, designwise and business-wise. TSR almost went backrupt and yet it was professionals with expertise working there. 4e bombed. Still made by pros. Some of the same from the TSR days and some peopel who worked on 4e are still with WotC today.

All this means is that your appeal to authority is not valid in this case.

 

[Nebulous]

IMO what they need to do is announce some form of the OGL so 3rd party publishers can fill the void and this wont be an issue.

I agree, this is all that has to happen. If the Fifth edition Foes book is any indication of what 3PP would look like, i'd be happy as a clam. Not a glut of stuff, but just enough high quality material that is moderately paced.

 

[Nergal Pendragon]

Your missing Sailor Moon's (I can't believe I said that) point. Being the owner of something doesn't ou are always right. An owner can make mistakes. People at WotC and TSR have made many mistakes, designwise and business-wise. TSR almost went backrupt and yet it was professionals with expertise working there. 4e bombed. Still made by pros. Some of the same from the TSR days and some peopel who worked on 4e are still with WotC today.

All this means is that your appeal to authority is not valid in this case.

And you missed my point and why Sailor Moon's point is invalid in this case.

No matter what, at the end of the day Sailor Moon does not have access to how people are reacting to DnD and isn't sitting back and looking at first-hand data as to how it's selling. That's information only WotC has, and they are letting it and the response to their current marketing strategy dictate how they deal with the product. Just like they let it convince them that 4E was not going to sell like they want and was simply too hated by a lot of the fanbase (not making any judgement calls on how good 4E was or not; just stating how fans reacted).

Who has first-hand data as to what players want the release schedule to be based on actually asking the players? WotC, again.

Yeah, they made mistakes. But they're the ones in the best position to learn from it because they have all of the information related to that mistake and the information as to how customers as a group best feel the product should be handled to appeal to them better. Not some random person on the net saying they are wrong just because that person's personal preferences don't match the pace.

Which is specifically why I brought up what examples I did when mentioning work made possible.

Also, keep in mind I was responding, originally, to Sailor Moon asking what makes WotC more right than Sailor Moon as to their decisions in how to run the game. That is why I brought up the property issue; from that standpoint alone, they are more right because they own the game. If they choose to drive it into the ground or end it, that is their right. So Sailor Moon's point doesn't apply because Sailor Moon is trying to argue that Sailor Moon has a better capacity to say how DnD should be run than WotC.

 

[Kramodlog]

Who has first-hand data as to what players want the release schedule to be based on actually asking the players? WotC, again.

No one is contesting that point. What is contencious is the decisions they are making with that data. 4e was made with a lot of data only they had. No need to go into further details about that little side trek.

Right now their release schedule, or absence thereof, raises some legitimate questions on how much WotC wants our money. Last I heard money helps make a profit and profit is life, profit is love.

I'm really curious to know what metric suddenly materialized that made them realize the market is already saturated with their books. Cause about two weeks ago the Adventurer's Handbook was still being made (as they sent the cover art to online retailers).

WotC isn't very forthcoming, to use a euphemism, with information and to be frank, we shouldn't always trust what they say.