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

[Meech17]

Colville is a published fantasy novelist, so it's possible he can write stories. I haven't read any of them, however.

I own both of them, and have read the first. It's fine. It's not the kind of book that made me run to all my friends who read fantasy and insist that they read it because it blew me away.. But I didn't hate it. The pacing was good and the characters were enjoyable. With that said it's been a couple years and the sequel is still on my TBR list. So it obviously didn't impress me that much. I do intend to read it soon though. I'm trying to read more, and I've just finished my second book for the year.

which puzzles me why he's never taken a crack at adventure module design

I can't help but wonder this as well. He has a burning love for adventure modules, and game design. He has waxed poetic about old modules quite a lot. I'm surprised he's never tried his hand at making one.

he established his brand by giving tons of good DM advice. There are many 5e youtubers, not that many make it to a brand like that.

Without the popularity of 5e, that still would not have happened however


same, from what little I have seen I like some ideas, but the superheroic tendencies and mandatory grid are not amongst them

I'm a really big fan of Colville. He got me back into D&D and behind the DM's screen. I watched his videos religiously for a couple years plotting out my campaign begging various friends to try playing, which never worked out until this last year.

Matt's videos are all mostly system agnostic. He uses/used 5E as the example because it was the current edition of the game and also the one he was playing. I think probably 2/3s, if not more of his advice could be carried over into just about any other system.

I'm in the same boat. I love Matt, I like the ideas he's showing off, and I enjoy the updates showing how the sausage is made in TTRPG development, but I don't think I'm the target audience for his game. I'm much more into theater of the mind style of play, with a lower emphasis on combat. I do hope it goes well and I look forward to seeing it. If he puts out a setting book I'll probably pick that up.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Not to start clickbait hysteria (again), but here's the new Professor DM video...

Please do more than just link the video. Give us at least a sentence explaining why you linked it, explaining the thesis of the video.

 

[Yaarel]

Please do more than just link the video. Give us at least a sentence explaining why you linked it, explaining the thesis of the video.

I didnt understand the reference to "hysteria".

The video itself seemed a modest, low-key prediction, that WotC would continue to make hardback D&D books, but fewer people would purchase them, and gradually, the players at large would use increasing amounts of digital products.

 

[Remathilis]

Heh... but the question for this is... is this because those products were objectively good, or merely because they were written in such a way that they matched your preferred style?

And that's the issue for all of us across the board when it comes to this stuff... how many products would we individually claim to be the peaks of module design could actually be crap for any number of other people because the stuff we find exceedingly important in a module is considered superfluous or trash for someone else?

Yes?

The writers had a good grasp of the rules. They were generally balanced, had interesting content, was easy to plug and play. They had very different styles (Paizo wrote complicated AP storylines Goodman wrote dungeon crawls) but in general, I didn't worry the materials were written by hacks who didn't understand the rules or structure of a good adventure. Yes, some of that is subjective, but I felt even the modules that didn't match my preferences were generally good. Exceptions exist, obviously.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Reasonable if you get something worthwhile for it. We don't owe WotC anything; they still have to release something worth buying, and what that is varies. A lot.

Oh I am sure I do. You probably won't.

 

[mamba]

I'm in the same boat. I love Matt, I like the ideas he's showing off, and I enjoy the updates showing how the sausage is made in TTRPG development, but I don't think I'm the target audience for his game. I'm much more into theater of the mind style of play, with a lower emphasis on combat.

I definitely want solid support for theatre of the mind, 13th Age style, but do not mind using a grid, it helps visualization a lot imo.

I like his videos and when I stumbled across them watched the series. He kinda brought me back to TTRPGs and it kinda was something that was happening in parallel regardless (or I would not have found him in the first place), either way I like Matt a lot.

Did back the MCDM RPG both as a ‘thank you’ and because I am genuinely curious, even if I might never run it, or just a one-shot.

 

[Retreater]

Please do more than just link the video. Give us at least a sentence explaining why you linked it, explaining the thesis of the video.

Sorry, I must've been in a hurry and didn't come back to it.

In the video, Professor DM states that his sources tell him that WotC/Hasbro has laid off the entirety of the book production team. (Not the design staff - those responsible for the printing and distribution of the physical product.) In the video he quotes job postings for digital product employees, ones with experience with subscription services, etc., as being further evidence that WotC is moving away from physical books.
He predicts that this will lead to D&D physical books becoming "for collectors" like how vinyl collectors buy records but most other consumers stream music nowadays.

I thought it was an interesting take about the future of the business. How about you?

 

[Meech17]

I definitely want solid support for theatre of the mind, 13th Age style, but do not mind using a grid, it helps visualization a lot imo.

I like his videos and when I stumbled across them watched the series. He kinda brought me back to TTRPGs and it kinda was something that was happening in parallel regardless (or I would not have found him in the first place), either way I like Matt a lot.

Did back the MCDM RPG both as a ‘thank you’ and because I am genuinely curious, even if I might never run it, or just a one-shot.

Thanks to those Campaign Cases being offloaded at Ollie's I'm actually planning on doing some grid based gameplay next weekend. It could prove to be a lot of fun. The party has the chance to sneak around a giant's house and if they do I think I'm going to draw out the whole house and show them where the giants are.. Or maybe just if they are in an adjacent room.. I don't know yet. But I think it could be a fun stealth game and the grid could add to that experience.

Who knows, maybe I'll get hooked to the grid and it'll change my mind.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I have faith in them to find a way.

I am sure you do. I am sure you are wrong though. 5e 2024 seems great so far.

 

[Meech17]

Yup. There are more people (a lot more people) than ever before that are now in the position we were in back in 2014, or 2008, or 2000, or 1989, where the company expects folks to just replace their core books. How many of those people are just going to throw that cash down and ditch the books for a game that got so many more people than ever into D&D?

This is still a little different though right? It's not so much like 2000, as it is like 2003. I wasn't playing back then, I wouldn't pick up the game for about another three years.. But how did the players then react? Did a lot of 3.0 players pick up the books, thinking

"I don't have to ditch my old books, and I can put these right next to those ones and use them in tandem"? There are plenty of people who I think will go all in, drop the $150-$200 on the new core three.. But I think there will be a lot of people who are happy with their current games but maybe pick up one, or two of the books. They want some new monsters, or new player options, or they're hoping for better GM advice than what was in the 2014 book which is widely regarded as lacking.

Also, I wonder how 3.5 felt to people who had skipped out on 3.0. Like were there any hard core 2E players out there who scoffed at 3.0 but then saw the revision, and felt "Hey look.. They fixed a lot of the stuff I wasn't interested in, maybe it's time to switch?"

Also also, I'm sure there's a large subset of players that don't look at it as ditching one edition for the new one. I was playing when 4E came out, and my group bought the books. We ended up bouncing off of it and went back to 3.5, because we had never ditched them in the first place.