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

[Jester David]

No, I don't see any circle for WotC to square. WotC has never said, "We're not doing psionics." And they have not said that we won't see additional rules and options. They are just not going to inundate us with splats every month. The release of splats, or expansion of the game, will still occur, just at a much slower pace.

It is reasonable to want and to expect WotC to publish some sort of psionics expansion at some point. It's reasonable to want it right away if you are a psionics fan. It is NOT reasonable to criticize WotC for not putting out psionics support RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I WANT IT! IMO, of course.

Patience. The turtle wins the race. And there are plenty of fun things to with D&D before we get psionics rules. And if you just can't wait, download fan psionic rules or create your own! Problem solved!

Plus it took two years to see psionics in both 2e and 4e and a year in 3e, so there's no reason to expect it right away now.

 

[delericho]

No, I don't see any circle for WotC to square.

If they support all the things people want, or even just the things it would be hard for people to convert for themselves, they have bloat. There's just too much there for it to be otherwise. If they don't, they're letting people down.

It is reasonable to want and to expect WotC to publish some sort of psionics expansion at some point. It's reasonable to want it right away if you are a psionics fan. It is NOT reasonable to criticize WotC for not putting out psionics support RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I WANT IT!

Lucky that's not what I said, then.

Patience.

You're ascribing impatience where there is none.

And, FWIW, psionics was just the example I chose because it's currently the biggest gap. But close that gap and another would become the biggest. That's a problem of having a player base with diverse taste that's numbered in the millions.

 

[Hussar]

I wonder if the OGL could solve this issue. The problem is, we don't want the "Wall of Books" scaring away folks. Ok, fair enough. Why not add something to the new OGL (or whatever it's called) that states that the cover of your 3pp has to clearly state that this is not official material? Something that clearly marks it as "Optional" and not part of the core game. That would solve the problem wouldn't it? Those that want the rules, can get them, and those that don't can easily ignore them.

 

[delericho]

Those that want the rules, can get them, and those that don't can easily ignore them.

In theory, that's how it should work regardless of whether WotC put out 50 supplements or third-party publishers do - people who don't want the rules should be able to ignore books they don't personally want whether they say "D&D" on the cover or not. To an extent, 'bloat' is an artificial problem, since people should really be able to just ignore it.

I'm inclined to think that a better solution to the problem is represented by the DDI - the use of an electronic database should help organise the material for easier reference, such that you don't then have seven 'books' to reference to create your character, just one database.

(The way I would do such a thing at would probably be to set it up now and then add a monthly packet that represents about a third of a sourcebook. That way, there's an ongoing stream of new material to attract subscribers. And once the stream of material runs dry they'd have a fully-populated database that would be worth maintaining a subscription to.)

Which might represent the best of all worlds: Basic D&D for those who want a stripped down experience, the PHB/DMG/MM for those who want the 'full' game but don't want bloat, and then the DDI Compendium for those who want everything.

They'd probably have to do the DDI instead of crunch-heavy supplements, right enough, because otherwise they'd be competing against themselves, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. And in print it would allow them to concentrate on their stories, safe in the knowledge that they're getting ~40k subscriptions each month at $6 each (ish).

 

[MerricB]

D&D has a couple of accidents of history that prolonged the life of one or two of its editions. The Lorraine Williams takeover of TSR almost certainly delayed the release of 2E, which Gary Gygax was beginning to consider at the time. Meanwhile, the bankruptcy of TSR also delayed work on 3E! (Which likely wouldn't have been like what we got).

Cheers!

 

[bmfrosty]

Why not just spin off some of the settings as other RPGs:

Dark Sun: A D&D System RPG
Eberron: A D&D System RPG
Planescape: A D&D System RPG
Ravenloft: A D&D System RPG

Any additional books for these RPGs wouldn't even mention D&D on the cover. They'd each get their own logo, and could be each their own small wall of books.

Maybe D&D proper gets a book of High Fantasy settings somewhere a couple of years in - just so that there's a full set of fluff for FR, Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and Mystara. I'm not even sure if these couldn't be described as 4 different eras or continents of the same world.

The whole point is that there are ways to produce the content without ignoring the settings entirely or adding complexity to the core RPG. Even just a rebranding of the big other settings could go a long way - even if it involves producing a set of core books for each that are mostly just edits of the core books for D&D.

 

[Jester David]

D&D has a couple of accidents of history that prolonged the life of one or two of its editions. The Lorraine Williams takeover of TSR almost certainly delayed the release of 2E, which Gary Gygax was beginning to consider at the time. Meanwhile, the bankruptcy of TSR also delayed work on 3E! (Which likely wouldn't have been like what we got).

Cheers!

I remember Mentzer talking about Gary's 2e. It likely would have abandoned classes for skill packages and likely been much more different than what we ended up getting.

 

[Jester David]

I wonder if the OGL could solve this issue. The problem is, we don't want the "Wall of Books" scaring away folks. Ok, fair enough. Why not add something to the new OGL (or whatever it's called) that states that the cover of your 3pp has to clearly state that this is not official material? Something that clearly marks it as "Optional" and not part of the core game. That would solve the problem wouldn't it? Those that want the rules, can get them, and those that don't can easily ignore them.

I've wondered about this as well and concur that a new OGL and robust number of 3rd Party Products would be a solid compromise, giving the people who want content something while allowing WotC to maintain their svelte schedule and focus on storylines.

Which makes it all the more confusing/frustrating that the OGL is months late...

 

[chriton227]

D&D has a couple of accidents of history that prolonged the life of one or two of its editions. The Lorraine Williams takeover of TSR almost certainly delayed the release of 2E, which Gary Gygax was beginning to consider at the time. Meanwhile, the bankruptcy of TSR also delayed work on 3E! (Which likely wouldn't have been like what we got).

Cheers!

Just yesterday I was listening to an interview that Fear the Boot did with Ryan Dancey back in 2007, he talked about how the deal for WotC to buy TSR came to be and the transition to 3e. From what he said, there was a "3e" in development before the acquisition, but it didn't really resemble 3e as we know it. It was more like a 2.5e, a streamlined 2nd Ed with some minor tweaks and adjustments, but nothing even as radical as rolling the Player's Options books into the base game. The interview is a good listen if you are interested in the history of that era of D&D, and they have some pretty good discussion about the player demographics and market research that WotC did in the lead-up to 3e.

 

[Hussar]

I've wondered about this as well and concur that a new OGL and robust number of 3rd Party Products would be a solid compromise, giving the people who want content something while allowing WotC to maintain their svelte schedule and focus on storylines.

Which makes it all the more confusing/frustrating that the OGL is months late...

I imagine this is a legal issue that's being gone over with a fine tooth comb/tied up in red tape at the corporate level because of the success of Paizo.

Just spitballing, but, what if they did an OGL with a 10 year limit? Say that the license is good until 2026 (if it came out in 2016) with the option of being renewed. Would publishers go for it?