D&D (2024) "The Future of D&D" (New Core Books in 2024!)

The online D&D Celebration event, which has been running all weekend, comes to a close with The Future of D&D, a panel featuring WotC's Ray Winninger, Liz Schuh, Chris Perkins, and Jeremy Crawford, hosted by Elle Osili-Wood.

D&D is exploring the multiverse
Revisiting classic settings. 1st of 3 settings (Ravenloft) released this year. Next year, the other two major classic D&D settings come out. Both in formats they've never published products before.

Plus a "little peek" at a third classic D&D setting - a cameo.

In 2023, yet another classic setting is coming out.

Evolving D&D
Because of new players, they're always listening. Exploring new styles of play (like no combat needed in Wild Beyond the Witchlight). Also presentation of monsters and spells. New product formats. More adventure anthologies.

Making products easier to use. Ways to create the best experience. Experimenting and looking into technology.

Approaches to Design
Wild Beyond the Witchlight has interior design and tools to make running the adventure easier. Story tracker, guidance.

Beyond the books, they want to make different and varied products - packaging and form factor. Things different to hardcovers and boxed sets.

A blog post is coming soon detailing some of the changes, with more to come in future posts.

50th Anniversary in 2024
They've begun work on new versions of the core rulebooks. Recent surveys tie into that. They're still making plans, but expect more surveys. More will be said next year.

They will be completely compatible!

New experiences in the digital arena.

January Gift Set
Rules Expansion Gift Set -- Xanathar, Tasha, and a new book: Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse. All in a slipcase. Was intended for the Holidays, but global production issues mean January instead. There's also an alternate cover version.

D&D 5E - A Closer Look At January's D&D Rules Expansion Gift Set

WotC earlier announced a D&D Rules Expansion Gift Set for January, which includes three books - Xanathar's Guide to Everything, Tasha's Cauldron of Everything, and the new Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse. These were intended for the holidays, but the global production issues...

www.enworld.org

Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse
A treasure trove of creature related material from previous products compiled into one book and updated.

Opportunity to update material with a feel for how the 50th Anniversary books will be.

Improvements based on feedback, rebalancing, new and old art.

Over 250 monsters, and 30 playable races. All of the setting agnostic races that have been published outside the Player's Handbook.

Some content from Witchlight, Fizban's, and Strixhaven was influenced by Mordenkainen's.

Available first in the gift set, but separately later in the year.

Monsters alphabetized throughout rather than using subsections.

D&D 5E - Zooming In On Monsters of the Multiverse [UPDATED!]

Earlier, WotC announced Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse, a new D&D compilation of monster material from previous products updated to a new format. These screen grabs are as good as I could get them. They're not terribly clear, but you can make more out than in the original...

www.enworld.org

Stat block changes --

Spellcasting trait is gone. Spellcasting action, slimmed down. Spellcasting monsters need less prep.

Spell slots are gone for NPCs. Regular actions that would have once been spells.

It was too easy for a DM to use spells which result in the monster having a too low effective CR.

Monsters can be friends or foes, and some magic will help rather than hinder PCs.

Where are we going?
More adventure anthologies. Another classic setting fairly soon.

Two all-new settings. Completely new. In development stage, an 'exploration' phase, testing the viability of them. They might not see the light of day.

Retooling nostalgia and blending it with new concepts. A blend of things that you know, and things that they have never done before.

In the short term -- more news next month about a new product for 2022 which goes into a new scary place we've never been before.

Boo the miniature giant space hamster
Below is an sketch from Hydro74's alt cover, which features Boo the miniature giant space hamster.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

All actors in a society have a moral obligation to not actively harm the society.

Agreed.

No one has a moral obligation to get rich or make others rich.

Those people with the wherewithal have a moral obligation to generate wealth, because without wealth the is no way to help those who don't have that ability.

"Getting rich" only occurs when wealth is hoarded, rather than invested or used to help others.

Investment is gambling.

Investment is risking what you have in order to generate wealth, which can then be used to help others. It is morally reprehensible to hoard wealth rather than invest it.

The vast majority of investment in companies like Hasbro comes from the savings and pensions of ordinary people, not the super-rich.

If a company is maximizing profit beyond what is needed to make a profit, by means that are sketchy or unethical, then they are behaving unethically. Being a corporation doest release them from basic ethical obligation to the community.

It's the role of society to ensure that corporations behave ethically. It's currently not doing a good job of that, but that's not WotC's fault. If you come up with any evidence that WotC are behaving unethically then I am happy to criticise.

But round here, "unethical" seams to mean "doesn't give me free stuff" or "doesn't cater to my personal preferences".

Hey maybe you could not make very very politically charged, very controversial, declarative statements that aren’t even related to the thread topic, that replying to properly would require breaking forum rules?

I was responding to a very politically charged, very controversial, declarative statement.

Like, there are other places where you can complain about how the youth don’t love an exploitive economic system that is largely failing them hard enough.

I completely agree with this. But outlawing profit and making everyone equally poor isn't going to help anyone.

Redistribution of wealth is great. But you need something to redistribute first.

Which, tbh I don’t even think is what is happening with Wizards. I don’t really get why folks are acting like Wizards is behaving badly, right now.

I absolutely agree with this. It was the base assumption that WotC are behaving unethically by catering to profitable markets that angered me.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Agreed.

Those people with the wherewithal have a moral obligation to generate wealth, because without wealth the is no way to help those who don't have that ability.

This is a twisted logic born out of being raised to view everything through a lense that supports laise faire capitalism and a culture that refuses to hold corporations and the wealthy accountable.

"Getting rich" only occurs when wealth is hoarded, rather than invested or used to help others.

If we accept this at face value, it still means that the extremely wealthy are inherently unethical. More wealth would be generated by them paying more taxes and those extra taxes being given to the working class so that they have more resources and are able to do more than just survive. In fact, paying a sub-living wage when capable of making a profit while paying more is inherently unethical (I would say inherently immoral) because it stifles the most effective means of promoting the common good in a capitalist economy, which is spending and investment by the masses. Further, companies that monopolise markets are worse for communities than small locally owned business that must compete with others like themselves, and the common good is better served by increasing the number of small business owners rather than the number of wage workers. A wage above the bare minimum to barely survive is required for the masses to be able to achieve those goals.

Investment is risking what you have in order to generate wealth, which can then be used to help others. It is morally reprehensible to hoard wealth rather than invest it.

This is a twisting of what is being discussed. Yes it is morally reprehensible for the wealthy to hoard their wealth. High level investment is, however, very often a form of wealth hoarding, and promotes monopolization. That wealth would be further from being hoarded by being taxed and distributed.

The vast majority of investment in companies like Hasbro comes from the savings and pensions of ordinary people, not the super-rich.

Citation needed, but also

It's the role of society to ensure that corporations behave ethically.

Only partly. The bulk of the responsibility of ethical behavior is on the individual or group acting in a given situation. That certain countries do not hold wealthy individuals and corporations accountable does not remove the responsibility for their own actions from those individuals and corporations.

It's currently not doing a good job of that, but that's not WotC's fault. If you come up with any evidence that WotC are behaving unethically then I am happy to criticise.

I literally have explicitly said, perhaps in the same post you're quoting, that I don't think Wizards is especially relevant to the discussion of corporate ethics. Please only reply to things I've said when replying to me.

But round here, "unethical" seams to mean "doesn't give me free stuff" or "doesn't cater to my personal preferences".

I was responding to a very politically charged, very controversial, declarative statement.

No, you weren't. At worst, you were responding to a misguided aiming of fairly uncontroversial arguements at a target that probably isn't guilty of any unethical behavior (in this context). You responded as if capitalism was under threat and need you to defend it!

I completely agree with this. But outlawing profit and making everyone equally poor isn't going to help anyone.

Show me who suggest doing so, and where. There are better uses of hay than making straw men to throw rocks at and pretend you're defending the village, I promise.

Redistribution of wealth is great. But you need something to redistribute first.

Okay?

I absolutely agree with this. It was the base assumption that WotC are behaving unethically by catering to profitable markets that angered me.

If that is the case, you wildly misdirected that anger.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I'm a businessman, and as a businessman, I believe that now is not the time for WotC to raise the MSRP on their books. (I don't think enough of the audience can handle it). In particular after announcing record profits. (Bad optics). Doesn't make me anti-capitalist.

(Though I absolutely AM anti xxxtreme capitalist, which seems to me to be a growing problem in the world).

 

[Paul Farquhar]

This is a twisted logic born out of being raised to view everything through a lense that supports laise faire capitalism and a culture that refuses to hold corporations and the wealthy accountable.

I'm not a laise faire capitalist, I'm a socialist who understands socialism has no chance of being adopted while it spouts illogical anti-wealth rhetoric that alienates a significant portion the population.

If we accept this at face value, it still means that the extremely wealthy are inherently unethical.

Assuming they aren't putting their wealth to use helping the poor, absolutely. But that's not a reason to bash WotC for seeking to make a profit.

More wealth would be generated by them paying more taxes and those extra taxes being given to the working class so that they have more resources and are able to do more than just survive.

That's an overly simplistic interpretation. Over-simplification of issues that have no simple answers is a characteristic of both the political left and the political right. Neither hammering the wealthy with 99% taxes, or a laise faire "trickle down" approach work. It's not trendy, fashionable, or simple, but only a middle approach that encourages wealth generation and redistributes a portion of that wealth is going to benefit the poorest in society.

Anyway, it's society that sets (and enforces - or fails to) taxes. If WotC are evading their taxes then I agree that is unethical. If WotC are seeking to cater to the most profitable markets instead of making the stuff I want, that is entirely ethical.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

(Though I absolutely AM anti xxxtreme capitalist, which seems to me to be a growing problem in the world).

Hmm, in the UK at least, the political Right appears to be turning it's back on capitalism, in favour of petty nationalism, that is very anti-capitalist in character.

 

[FrogReaver]

Hmm, in the UK at least, the political Right appears to be turning it's back on capitalism, in favour of petty nationalism, that is very anti-capitalist in character.

One can very much support capitalism within your nation while finding it unfair on a global scale due to having no say over the governmental policies, taxes, regulations, and subsidies of other nations.

 

[Morrus]

You folks seem to be confused about where you are. Why are you discussing politics? Here's a refresher on the rules, if you've forgotten them:

Terms and rules

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I'm not a laise faire capitalist, I'm a socialist who understands socialism has no chance of being adopted while it spouts illogical anti-wealth rhetoric that alienates a significant portion the population.

Assuming they aren't putting their wealth to use helping the poor, absolutely. But that's not a reason to bash WotC for seeking to make a profit.

That's an overly simplistic interpretation. Over-simplification of issues that have no simple answers is a characteristic of both the political left and the political right. Neither hammering the wealthy with 99% taxes, or a laise faire "trickle down" approach work. It's not trendy, fashionable, or simple, but only a middle approach that encourages wealth generation and redistributes a portion of that wealth is going to benefit the poorest in society.

Anyway, it's society that sets (and enforces - or fails to) taxes. If WotC are evading their taxes then I agree that is unethical. If WotC are seeking to cater to the most profitable markets instead of making the stuff I want, that is entirely ethical.

I don’t know how else to tell you to either show me where I accused Wizards of any of that or stop replying to me as if I had.

As for the economic stuff, we aren’t actually that far apart then, but you seem prone to wildly exaggerating what someone has said into the most extreme possible statement that kinda looks like what they said, so I won’t discuss it any further.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Yeah, sounds like we're in agreement.

 

[dmgorgon]

So … 5.5 edition? 6th edition? AD&D 5e? Just curious how they will brand it.

Lol, I doubt there will be anything advanced about it