D&D 5E (2024) Predict WotC's 2026 D&D releases

[Reynard]

I mean, so is a utterly incompatible 6e that forces you to start your collection over again. 5.5 was a compromise between trying to innovate enough to justify a new PHB without sacrificing sales of their settings and supplements.

I would be very surprised if we do not see updated reprints of most of the catalogue if 5E 2024 remains the current edition for another decade.

 

[Remathilis]

I would be very surprised if we do not see updated reprints of most of the catalogue if 5E 2024 remains the current edition for another decade.

I don't think we're going to see new versions of modules, and I think settings will be updated in expansions (like Forge of the Artificer) rather then reprints. So I don't see Curse of Strahd 2024 or Van Richten's Guide 2024, but I do see a new Ravenloft book or module that updates mechanics in it (in fact, we've already seen both subclasses, dhampir and the inquisitive background updated, so there isn't much left to revise).

The only books that will be invalidated are Xanathar's and Tasha's. Everything else will be patched via supplement.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I would be very surprised if we do not see updated reprints of most of the catalogue if 5E 2024 remains the current edition for another decade.

Whist I sure there isn’t a 6e in the immediate future, I very much doubt it will be as much as a decade. 6-8 years until D&D the Daggerheart edition.

 

[Reynard]

I don't think we're going to see new versions of modules, and I think settings will be updated in expansions (like Forge of the Artificer) rather then reprints. So I don't see Curse of Strahd 2024 or Van Richten's Guide 2024, but I do see a new Ravenloft book or module that updates mechanics in it (in fact, we've already seen both subclasses, dhampir and the inquisitive background updated, so there isn't much left to revise).

The only books that will be invalidated are Xanathar's and Tasha's. Everything else will be patched via supplement.

Only time will tell.

I do think there will be a X&T replacement sooner rather than later.

 

[bedir than]

Oh please no...

I tried to like DH. It's too loosey goosey for my tastes. I'd much prefer 5.75 over DH if that's the direction they go in...

This is why iterative changes are most likely for the market leader. They can be the second favorite for a large swath of players. But they can't be the favorite for a narrow band and ignored by most.

 

[Rainbow Scissors]

I think the issue is that you are equating your opinion of 5.24 (that you have little interest) into a general status (WotC is in spaghetti mode while developing a D&D you'd prefer) and that doesn't jive with what others are seeing. It's fine to not like 5.24 or 5e altogether, but that's not proof WotC has already abandoned it like your post implied. You've given up on 5.24, WotC hasn't.

That's what people are reacting to.

I did not equate the two things. I stated my prediction. For the sake of transparency and honesty, I also have stated that 5.24 turned out to be something that was not what I had hoped. I stated two things, but I did not equate the two things. Perhaps that was not clear and was assumed to mean I was stating a cause-effect relationship between them due to the limitations of text-based communication.

This is off topic, but to elaborate:
I was and am happy with a lot of early 5th Edition. 5.24 "fixed" parts of it that were not broken. In particular, I thought that how 5th Edition backgrounds worked in 2014 were great and included narrative elements that were fun. While that concept could have been refined and made better, 5.24 did not do that. Instead, 5.24 reworked how backgrounds work and removed those narrative elements. Supposedly, some of the changes to the game, backgrounds, and where ability score boosts come from were made for the benefit of people from demographics that include me. Speaking only for myself, those changes did nothing to make me feel more connected with D&D.

In contrast, the parts of 5th Edition that I did feel needed to be changed were either not changed or not changed enough. Yes, feats were improved, but there are still too few decision points for that to matter. Printing better feats does little to improve selecting them if the structure of 5th Edition is still one that gives very view opportunities to select them. Adding weapon abilities is an attempt to address making combat more interesting, but the core structure of the game still maintains aspects such as over-bloated hitpoints as fundamental building blocks and central tenants to how the game works.

In short, 5.24 too often makes changes that were not needed for little-to-no gain while simultaneously not making changes where they should have been made to serve some idea of backwards compatibility that has mixed results. I would be okay with losing elements that I liked if they were replaced by other things that enhanced my enjoyment of the game, but, even then, the outcome would just still be playing 5th Edition, which I can already do without needing to buy it a second time.

I do not feel that I gave up on D&D. I would not even claim that 5.24 is a bad game. It is simply is not one that evolved D&D in a direction I feel compelled to pay for.

 

[tetrasodium]

This is why iterative changes are most likely for the market leader. They can be the second favorite for a large swath of players. But they can't be the favorite for a narrow band and ignored by most.

Nah. Dagger Heart solidly nails a particular niche(so does Draw Steel shadow Run DCC 5Shadow Dark). Those are all games with solid niches they accurately target their gameplay towards with not one of them missing it's niche by trying to be d&d.

 

[bedir than]

Nah. Dagger Heart solidly nails a particular niche(so does Draw Steel shadow Run DCC 5Shadow Dark). Those are all games with solid niches they accurately target their gameplay towards with not one of them missing it's niche by trying to be d&d.

Yes, this is what I'm saying.
D&D can't be a niche leader, nor should it try.