D&D (2024) Speculation Welcome: What's Next for D&D?

[TheSword]

I love big dungeon crawls. Sadly my group does not. Which reflects why I like the original Ravenloft module more than the 5E version. Straight to the meat.

Definitely check out Scarlet Citadel. @GuyBoy is running it for us now and we are thoroughly enjoying it. The levels are big enough but not outrageous. Certainly not Mad Mage big. Maybe a quarter of the size of each level.

 

[Retreater]

Ok. I like Strongholds and Followers but to say it’s much better than anything WotC releases is surprising. It’s different, but a lot of people would consider it overpowered and pretty niche. I’d certainly have to think carefully before including the options, the one time it fitted and I did, it worked.

I don’t see how you can compare a supplement with a few subsystems though to something with the complexity of a campaign book. You literally just said you don’t want drop in stuff that’s too short but somehow where evil lurks (which is full of such things) is spot on? The difference in page count is like two or three pages per adventure.

I don't recall saying everything MCDM produces is better than everything WotC produces, so I'm sorry if I gave that impression. I did say Matt Colville worked on Strongholds and Followers, and I think it was a pretty high quality offering generally speaking.
I would say that his Flee Mortals is a higher quality than the Monster Manual (for my tastes). The organization is better and more useful. It has subsystems (companions, minions). It has what I think is a workable challenge system, and the art/paper quality is better too (IMO).
So let me compare Where Evil Lurks to a "lair" book (like Candlekeep) - and this is just my preference. First, Where Evil Lurks has a small dungeon of 5+ rooms, chock full of encounters and treasure rewards. Each will easily last an evening of play. This is also because the fights are more involved and dynamic than typical 5e fights ... whereas Candlekeep might be "go here and there's a Knight - use the stats from the Monster Manual." Candlekeep uses its page count for fluff and non-gameable content, where as Where Evil Lurks is packed with adventure, monsters, traps, treasure, maps. Where Evil Lurks is 4-5 hours of play. Candlekeep is "maybe" 1-2 hours?
Where Evil Lurks also spans Levels 2-20, with something for every level (some levels have multiple adventures too.) Candlekeep has levels 1-16 (because WotC rarely writes above the teens?)
So, yes, Where Evil Lurks presents drop-in "monster of the week" lairs, they are more fleshed out than what we find in a product like Candlekeep Mysteries. (Additionally, it provides new monsters from Flee Mortals and the relevant rules and subsystems.) I think it's a much better value and more inspired design, at least for my tastes.

 

[Clint_L]

I can't quantify their passion or enthusiasm by a metric other than the products they create, which I find less engaging than what Coville or Mona makes.

Is it possible that it's you, not them?

 

[Retreater]

Is it possible that it's you, not them?

I believe that the appreciation of any creative work can be subjective and dependent on personal tastes, I think there are also objective metrics for art. I've been doing this since college and have been doing it professionally as a librarian for nearly 30 years. I do value the opinions of many critics.
A guy who stumbles drunk with his friends from Buffalo Wild Wings might have a great time watching Expendables 4, but that doesn't mean it's as good of a film artistically as Oppenheimer. So I'm more inclined to believe the reviewer who can break down the technical merits, performances, and faithfulness to the source of material for Oppenheimer than random dude who staggered out of Expendables.
I've been in this hobby a long time. I've read a lot of books and run a lot of games. I've written and edited for game publishers. It takes more to impress me than most products put out. (And that's often a bad thing.) Most of the stuff Wizards makes doesn't impress me. It hasn't been tested, adequately edited, or written with passion (or that passion has been culled out by some design lead.)
I've seen more heart and soul in a staple-bound zine than in a $100 boxed set.
When stuff isn't good, we should be able to point out the faults of those products.
So, to come around to answering the question: Yes, it's me. I'm not pleased with middling content.

 

[MockingBird]

I believe that the appreciation of any creative work can be subjective and dependent on personal tastes, I think there are also objective metrics for art. I've been doing this since college and have been doing it professionally as a librarian for nearly 30 years. I do value the opinions of many critics.
A guy who stumbles drunk with his friends from Buffalo Wild Wings might have a great time watching Expendables 4, but that doesn't mean it's as good of a film artistically as Oppenheimer. So I'm more inclined to believe the reviewer who can break down the technical merits, performances, and faithfulness to the source of material for Oppenheimer than random dude who staggered out of Expendables.
I've been in this hobby a long time. I've read a lot of books and run a lot of games. I've written and edited for game publishers. It takes more to impress me than most products put out. (And that's often a bad thing.) Most of the stuff Wizards makes doesn't impress me. It hasn't been tested, adequately edited, or written with passion (or that passion has been culled out by some design lead.)
I've seen more heart and soul in a staple-bound zine than in a $100 boxed set.
When stuff isn't good, we should be able to point out the faults of those products.
So, to come around to answering the question: Yes, it's me. I'm not pleased with middling content.

To you. Like was stated before it's all subjective. Let's look at your comparisons of movies. I'm not a fan of Expendables but I can appreciate parts of it. It's a love letter to action flicks. I can appreciate that. It's never going to compare to Oppenheimer though. I bet I can find someone who hated Oppenheimer. So again it's all subjective. I can respect your opinions on WotC material. It's what you like or don't like. I get it. But I got to say it's kind of hard to take you seriously on the matter. It feels like you haven't really given some of the stuff a chance. In my opinion a better lair book to compare to the MCDM book would be Fizbans or Bigbys. Those two books have a ton of great lairs to build from.

 

[Retreater]

In my opinion a better lair book to compare to the MCDM book would be Fizbans or Bigbys. Those two books have a ton of great lairs to build from.

Haven't looked at those. I've been hesitant to get more monster books because the design in general hasn't appealed to me in the books I already have (Mordenkainen's, Volos).
Honestly, I think the villain lairs in Dragon Heist were pretty good portions of that adventure.
But that's the problem I have with the WotC books - only a small portion of them are useful to me.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

What 3 party adventure anthology is better than Yawning Portal?

Nearly all of them? Yawning Portal is extremely mediocre.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It is challenging to sort thru indy stuff to find stuff for both taste and quality.

This website helpfully publishes lists of award-nominated and award-winning game content throughout the year.

People wanting a quick 5E adventure recommendation (but probably suitable for most fantasy games), which I found out about first on this website and then looked up more reviews elsewhere, before buying it myself: Barkeep on the Borderlands.

 

[Clint_L]

I believe that the appreciation of any creative work can be subjective and dependent on personal tastes, I think there are also objective metrics for art. I've been doing this since college and have been doing it professionally as a librarian for nearly 30 years. I do value the opinions of many critics.
A guy who stumbles drunk with his friends from Buffalo Wild Wings might have a great time watching Expendables 4, but that doesn't mean it's as good of a film artistically as Oppenheimer. So I'm more inclined to believe the reviewer who can break down the technical merits, performances, and faithfulness to the source of material for Oppenheimer than random dude who staggered out of Expendables.
I've been in this hobby a long time. I've read a lot of books and run a lot of games. I've written and edited for game publishers. It takes more to impress me than most products put out. (And that's often a bad thing.) Most of the stuff Wizards makes doesn't impress me. It hasn't been tested, adequately edited, or written with passion (or that passion has been culled out by some design lead.)
I've seen more heart and soul in a staple-bound zine than in a $100 boxed set.
When stuff isn't good, we should be able to point out the faults of those products.
So, to come around to answering the question: Yes, it's me. I'm not pleased with middling content.

Not liking a text is subjective. I don't have a problem with that. I have a big problem with projecting from your own taste into assuming you know what someone else is thinking or feeling. Setting aside your frequent hyperbolic statements, you have repeatedly accused various creators of lacking passion, etc., when your only evidence is how you feel.

Criticizing the product is fine. Criticizing the creators for how you assume they feel or think is not, IMO.

If we're talking credentials, I teach IB language and literature and creative writing, with an MA in literature/cultural studies. I have more than four decades in TTRPGs. I'm not seeing what you're seeing. Some WotC products are excellent. Some are not great. Few recent ones have been terrible. IMO. And the production quality is always very good. I have no idea how the designers were thinking or feeling while working on these products, so I'm not going to comment except for to note that whenever I see them speaking about or playing these games, they come across as both professional and passionate about what they do.

 

[Yaarel]

This website helpfully publishes lists of award-nominated and award-winning game content throughout the year.

People wanting a quick 5E adventure recommendation (but probably suitable for most fantasy games), which I found out about first on this website and then looked up more reviews elsewhere, before buying it myself: Barkeep on the Borderlands.

Heh, I just found from @DarkCrisis, the Rise of the Drow adventure is worth looking into.