D&D 5E To much 5th edition content?

[Neonchameleon]

There's been quite the deluge. I'm not happy about the quality level; my son loves dragons but was severely underwhelmed by Fizban's; he thinks the 3PP The Book of Dragons for 5th Edition - Dungeon Masters Guild | DriveThruRPG.com was a lot better, and I'd tend to agree. I recently got Tasha's for £17 on amazon, fine at that price but if I'd paid RRP as I did for Fizban's I'd have been severely underwhelmed. The Essentials Kit was the last WoTC product I bought that seemed worth the money, whereas most of the pre-2018 stuff I have seems decent. By contrast there is a lot of very good 3PP material out there now. WoTC seem to be going from a scarcity model to almost a 2e-style shovelware model; I preferred the former.

YMMV

I find Tasha's a much better and more interesting book than the much more trite and pedestrian Xanathar's - and when it comes to player facing content those are basically the only two books in town. Whatever you think of the Wyld Beyond the Wychlight it's certainly not shovelware. And certainly not one of the bad pre-2018 adventures.

And far from being on a 2e-style shovelware model (let alone a 3.X one) we're still on a 1e pace. By Wikipedia we had a core or supplemental rulebook in 2018 (Mordaniken's Tome of Foes), 2020 (Tasha's), and 2021 (Fizban's). By comparison 1e had Deities & Demigods in 1980, the Fiend Folio in 1981, and the MM2 in 1983. And that's before the floodgates opened in 1985 with a whole three (!) core or supplemental books and 2 each in 1986 and 1987.

We've had as near as I can tell 11 published adventures in the same four years; you might even argue 15 if you count the Strahd reprint, and the starter box advbentures. Looking at the list of TSR adventures in the five years before the floodgates opened in 1985 (i.e. 1980-1984) I'm only going to name the famous ones because there were so many. Listing them there was A1-4 (Slave Lords), AC 1-3, B3-8, C1-3, CB (Conan the Barbarian) 1-2, CM 1-3, D1-2 as a compilation, Dragonlance 1-5, EX 1-2, the G1-3 Against the Giants compilation, I1-5, L1 & 2 (The Secret of Bone Hill and The Assassin's Knot), the solo adventures MSol 1-2 and MV1, N1-2 (Against The Cult of the Reptile God and the notorious The Forest Oracle), O1-2 (one on one modules), Q1 Queen of the Demonweb Pits, R1-4 + 6. S3 (Barrier Peaks), S4 (Tsojcanth), U1-3 (the Saltmarsh trilogy), WG4 (Tharizdun), WG5. X1 (Isle of Dread), X2 (Castle Amber), X3-8. So 1e, even before 1985, was on a significantly faster pace than 5e for publishing official adventures.

There is however one difference where 5e is faster. It's produced seven different setting books in those four years of which I think three (Ravnica, Theros, Strixhaven) are M:tG tie-ins and two are streamer tie-ins (Acquisitions Inc and Wildemount). Leaving just Eberron and Ravenloft.

In other words, other than in numbers of settings published 5e's acceleration means that it's catching up with the slow half of the AD&D 1e era. This is an acceleration, but there are reasons that, before the rise of Critical Role, I was joking that 5e was D&D: the mothballs edition.

 

[DND_Reborn]

In case you missed it, they have official committed to a refresh of the core books in 2024. They are going to be doing survey's and playtesting for those books, but they are intended to still be 5e (some may call it 5.5e).

No, I heard about it, which is why I said I doubted 6E was even in the works yet... I don't blame WotC, as long as new people keep playing the game, even older material is "new" to someone. I'll be curious to see what they do in 2024, but I'm not holding my breath.

It's not even close. In the 2e days TSR would publish the same number of titles in a month that Wizards publishes in a whole year. There are still big gaps in the content released that didn't exist when 2e was done. High level content? All the setting guides etc etc.

I didn't say it was close, I said it is starting to feel that way. I am well aware of all the junk put out for 2E. A lot of it was good for somebody, just not me.

5e is at this weird point where I think it's full of bloat and inconsistencies, while simultaneously missing certain things still.

Yeah, that pretty much sums it up nicely.

 

[DND_Reborn]

YMMV

I find Tasha's a much better and more interesting book than the much more trite and pedestrian Xanathar's - and when it comes to player facing content those are basically the only two books in town. Whatever you think of the Wyld Beyond the Wychlight it's certainly not shovelware. And certainly not one of the bad pre-2018 adventures.

And far from being on a 2e-style shovelware model (let alone a 3.X one) we're still on a 1e pace. By Wikipedia we had a core or supplemental rulebook in 2018 (Mordaniken's Tome of Foes), 2020 (Tasha's), and 2021 (Fizban's). By comparison 1e had Deities & Demigods in 1980, the Fiend Folio in 1981, and the MM2 in 1983. And that's before the floodgates opened in 1985 with a whole three (!) core or supplemental books and 2 each in 1986 and 1987.

We've had as near as I can tell 11 published adventures in the same four years; you might even argue 15 if you count the Strahd reprint, and the starter box advbentures. Looking at the list of TSR adventures in the five years before the floodgates opened in 1985 (i.e. 1980-1984) I'm only going to name the famous ones because there were so many. Listing them there was A1-4 (Slave Lords), AC 1-3, B3-8, C1-3, CB (Conan the Barbarian) 1-2, CM 1-3, D1-2 as a compilation, Dragonlance 1-5, EX 1-2, the G1-3 Against the Giants compilation, I1-5, L1 & 2 (The Secret of Bone Hill and The Assassin's Knot), the solo adventures MSol 1-2 and MV1, N1-2 (Against The Cult of the Reptile God and the notorious The Forest Oracle), O1-2 (one on one modules), Q1 Queen of the Demonweb Pits, R1-4 + 6. S3 (Barrier Peaks), S4 (Tsojcanth), U1-3 (the Saltmarsh trilogy), WG4 (Tharizdun), WG5. X1 (Isle of Dread), X2 (Castle Amber), X3-8. So 1e, even before 1985, was on a significantly faster pace than 5e for publishing official adventures.

There is however one difference where 5e is faster. It's produced seven different setting books in those four years of which I think three (Ravnica, Theros, Strixhaven) are M:tG tie-ins and two are streamer tie-ins (Acquisitions Inc and Wildemount). Leaving just Eberron and Ravenloft.

In other words, other than in numbers of settings published 5e's acceleration means that it's catching up with the slow half of the AD&D 1e era. This is an acceleration, but there are reasons that, before the rise of Critical Role, I was joking that 5e was D&D: the mothballs edition.

Excellent review!

But, honestly, I have to shake my head when I read some of your posts (not that there is anything wrong with them!).

We are SO UTTERLY AND COMPLETELY different in what appeals to us about 5E, it astounds me! Your comment about Critical Role tells me enough.

Still, I am glad one game can appeal to two individuals so very different. Cheers!

 

[Frozen_Heart]

every edition (expect 4e) has over loaded arcane and divine and short changed martial... including martial related to arce or divines.

I mean ironically for me, it's an arcane class which is missing (swordmage).

But yeah martials feel really walked on in 5e. There should be a warlord, and there should be a lot more options in the base classes for all martials.

 

[eyeheartawk]

We are SO UTTERLY AND COMPLETELY different in what appeals to us about 5E, it astounds me! Your comment about Critical Role tells me enough.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

Are you saying you disagree with the assertion that the rise of popularity of things like Critical Role and the influx of new/lapsed players into the hobby did not affect the release cadence? Or are you saying something else?

 

[Neonchameleon]

I mean ironically for me, it's an arcane class which is missing (swordmage).

To me, although I'd like to see an actual swordmage, there's already at least three subclasses that are different takes on the concept. The Eldritch Knight, the Bladesinger, the Hexblade/Pact of the Sword, and arguably the battlesmith artificer one or both of the Soulknight and Eldritch Trickster rogues.

But yeah martials feel really walked on in 5e. There should be a warlord, and there should be a lot more options in the base classes for all martials.

I'd say the the problem is that the fighter and rogue pretty much get their last new abilities at level 11 - and the monk more or less taps out at level 6. Meanwhile the casters keep getting stronger and more versatile in the second ten levels.

 

[HammerMan]

I mean ironically for me, it's an arcane class which is missing (swordmage).

But yeah martials feel really walked on in 5e. There should be a warlord, and there should be a lot more options in the base classes for all martials.

I actually agree on Swordmage being missing (That is what I meant by martial like arcane class)

the bladesinger and the eldritch knight are nice... but we need spells that wizards don't get that have more martial magic style

 

[DND_Reborn]

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

Are you saying you disagree with the assertion that the rise of popularity of things like Critical Role and the influx of new/lapsed players into the hobby did not affect the release cadence?

I know CR definitely brought an influx of players, etc., but how much it affected the release cadence beyond that impact I really can't say.

Or are you saying something else?

Something else. CR and such are taking D&D in a direction I (personally) don't want to see it go. One of the guys in my group likes it, I tried watching it and was bored out of my mind. But then again, that is a whole different issue and would derail the thread. If you want me to elaborate further, p.m. me.

 

[Parmandur]

In case you missed it, they have official committed to a refresh of the core books in 2024. They are going to be doing survey's and playtesting for those books, but they are intended to still be 5e (some may call it 5.5e).

They didn't say it will still be 5E, they said it would be compatible. If they call it 6E, but you can play 5E material interchangeably, it wouldn't be that different than most other RPGs that maintain compatibility between editions.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I know CR definitely brought an influx of players, etc., but how much it affected the release cadence beyond that impact I really can't say

Something else. CR and such are taking D&D in a direction I (personally) don't want to see it go. One of the guys in my group likes it, I tried watching it and was bored out of my mind. But then again, that is a whole different issue and would derail the thread. If you want me to elaborate further, p.m. me.

Huh. The thing here is that I don't think I've ever spoken particularly positively about Critical Role other than to talk about how he's drawn a lot of people to the game. The only comments about CR I made were that (1) Wildemount is an official book and the CR setting and 2 to imply that the sharply increasing popularity of D&D 5e from about 2015 into the pandemic was significantly influenced by CR.

And my comment about the Mothballs Edition was referring to the release cycle. That 5e after launch basically went into mothballs with almost no releases. Even in recent years it's still on the slowest release rate since the 70s. Which I don't see as a bad thing (but I do see slow as beating near zero).