D&D 5E Origin New Edition Panel

[LFK]

Well, one of the key problems with the comparison is simply the vector of interaction with the two games.

Magic is a game where each instance takes 5-20 minutes with minimal continuity. You often have several decks on the go at one time (if not dozens among the hardcore crowd) and you're not trying to sync up with a whole bunch of people. Magic is a game that's much easier to squeeze in between other stuff, so you're effectively resolving the life of that deck over and over and over.

The persistence of D&D is what gets in the way of creating the same kind of excitement for splats that you get for new Magic sets. Buying a box of Theros and putting together an all-white Heroic/token deck doesn't present a huge opportunity cost to playing your green/black Golgari deck you built during Return to Ravnica. Picking up Splat 2015 and rolling up an Artificer means, for most players, not playing their Druid anymore.

So to get the same kind of evergreening you need to change the core of how people experience the game, introduce more churn, shorten the instant to instant lifecycle.

You'd basically have to get everyone interested in pre-canned adventures focusing on higher lethality episodic content, and convince players that easy-come-easy-go is the "core" way of playing the game.

 

[thalmin]

From the beginning, TSR and then WotC have incorporated errata into their books with almost every reprint. Usually it was small (spelling, punctuation) or relatively minor (rules clarification), although sometimes it was more substantial. I only remember a couple times that TSR sent out a notice about the errata through The Dragon (Dragon Magazine). There may have been more, but these are what I can remember.

1. Issue 35 of The Dragon had 1 1/2 pages, with a half page each to MM, PHB, and DMG
2. Issue 103 of Dragon Magazine had I think about 2 pages of errata for the Unearthed Arcana.

Also, a few times corrections were mentioned in an article or Letter to the Editor. Otherwise, we were all in the dark when a change was made, until they did a revision like the second version of the 2E core books.

 

[damngravity]

Taken from Chris Tulach's twitter feed

will be more of a living game and a conversation rather than Wizards dictating what the game should be.

Starting next spring, surveys will go out to assess how rules elements of the game are faring.

And that seems to be that.

The survey was part of the living game idea. As the game is played they will gauge the elements of the game by survey to see how the game is doing and make changes based on feedback from the player base. Basically extending the playtest to a continuous improvement process. Mike stated the changes would probably show in Basic DND first and only trigger a new edition for major change that the player base wants in the game. He was not suggesting anything like MTG's new edition every year.

 

[Talath]

Holy. Crap. Can I just talk about how everytime someone from WotC opens their mouth and says something about 5e I just get more excited? It could be something like, where Mearls says, "We're printing the new D&D on books, with words." And I'm like "HOLY CRAP THAT IS AWESOME I LOVE WORDS!"

It has gotten to that point. Fanboi5ever.

 

[damngravity]

PHB went to printers on Tuesday.

 

[damngravity]

Fighter subclass. Erdrich Knight 1/4 caster. Cast wizard's spells from evocation and abjuration schools.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Good stuff. For a long time now, D&D has been all about a group of game designers deciding in a vacuum what they think would be cool for the game. In fact, even when WotC voiced concern over what players would want from them, it was something like "our bestselling books have the words dragon and magic in the title, so we created this book called Dragon Magic, enjoy!."

To be fair, as cynical as that was, it actually generated a pretty good book.

 

[Isklexi]

Note, this is Redbadge, I accidentally posted on my brother-in-law's account while at his house:

Now that I'm on a proper computer, let me revise my analogy.

To be clear, I don't think Magic really has annual "editions." Magic 2.0 was never announced; it would have been suicide (you think the edition wars are bad?!). Magic is just Magic, regardless of the number of "editions." However, Magic in 2014 is significantly different from Magic in 1994. The changes have just been incremental enough that few have noticed or cared (although a number of people have decried "the death of magic" with each major new change from the beginning).

In the same way, Dungeons and Dragons will look significantly different, if still recognizable, 20 years from now. With each year, splats, errata, and changes will be introduced, even in an evergreen scenario (assuming WotC actually intends to sell new stuff every year). Hopefully, a new set of Core Rules will have been published one or more times in the interim.

Honestly, the model is not that different from what has been tried in the past: core rulebooks, supported by splat, refreshed occasionally by rules updates and new editions and new "half editions."

However, the point I'm trying to make about Magic is that when WotC introduces a new expansion, a new core set, even a major new rules overhaul (planeswalkers, Commander, etc.), people don't argue (for the most part) about the new changes or additions. They don't say, "So are you switching to Khans of Tarkir or sticking with Theros?... Well, I've already got so much buy in on this edition and don't like the new mechanics." For the most part, they just accept that these things come every year and just pay out (lots, in the aggregate) of money so that the Magic juggernaut marches on.

My conjecture was that WotC would like to match this dynamic with D&D going forward, such that periodic "edition" changes are whole-heartedly accepted and expansion material rakes in the dough, in perpetuity.

Any points about switching costs and length of play with regards to Magic seems to mimic the direction they are trying to go in D&D with quicker, more stream-lined character creation, play, and character advancement in the newest edition, such that you've finished a campaign with your druid (about 8 months) by the time the next best thing comes out. And just like people will always play slivers at the Magic table, there will always be someone to play the basic classes no matter what the newest thing is.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

To be fair, as cynical as that was, it actually generated a pretty good book.

Then, let's celebrate that WotC is moving to a feedback model, instead of just trying to get lucky with a wild guess...

 

[Paraxis]

Wherein ENWorld Paraxis:



Argues with WOTC Paraxis:


I am hoping for a death match.

I am both Paraxi

I don't see a conflict, I don't care that a sidebar is included to make what I assume to be a very small portion of the fan base happy, because it makes them happy. But I still think it is a whacky mechanic, I used it for 15 years.