Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana probably coming to D&D website (Reddit AMA)

[ranger69]

I think that this time WOTC are using a slow but steady business model, and trying to keep quality high.
I agree that one of the things that put people of previous editions was the sheer number of splat books that came out. A lot of people are on limited income and have to save up for a book. It could be off-putting that by the time you had saved for a book, three more had been published.
As regards Psionics, Kender, warforged et al. If they are introduced in players guides for a AP that is separate to the AP then it should not be a major problem.
Also I seem to remember mention if a annual publication, that may tie in peoples favourite entries from AP's.
I am unlikely to use a battle system, however, I would rather that they took their time to get it right, rather than rush out something that doesn't work.
Some form of OGL would be something to look forward to, although that in itself could lead to system bloat. however, that then would not be directly be WOTC's fault.
Whatever WOTC is putting on-line for no cost are loss leaders to entice people back to/ or into D&D and roleplaying in general. This is not a tactic unknown in the retail world.

 

[mflayermonk]

You know, if I were Pazio I would be looking to the OGL next year and do my own 5E line, something new (Planescapey setting?) and I think they would secure being the number one RPG publisher.

Or maybe something like 13th Age.

 

[Nebulous]

You know, if I were Pazio I would be looking to the OGL next year and do my own 5E line, something new (Planescapey setting?) and I think they would secure being the number one RPG publisher.

I dunno. I'm sure that WotC is doing everything they can do reclaim that position. I would think they would take precautions so that another company can't take their rules and run with it, but i don't know.

 

[Nebulous]

I think that this time WOTC are using a slow but steady business model, and trying to keep quality high.
I agree that one of the things that put people of previous editions was the sheer number of splat books that came out. A lot of people are on limited income and have to save up for a book. It could be off-putting that by the time you had saved for a book, three more had been published.
As regards Psionics, Kender, warforged et al. If they are introduced in players guides for a AP that is separate to the AP then it should not be a major problem.
Also I seem to remember mention if a annual publication, that may tie in peoples favourite entries from AP's.
I am unlikely to use a battle system, however, I would rather that they took their time to get it right, rather than rush out something that doesn't work.
Some form of OGL would be something to look forward to, although that in itself could lead to system bloat. however, that then would not be directly be WOTC's fault.
Whatever WOTC is putting on-line for no cost are loss leaders to entice people back to/ or into D&D and roleplaying in general. This is not a tactic unknown in the retail world.

At the time, at the beginning of 3e and for years afterward, the avalanche of splat books was welcome, encouraged and loved by many people, myself included. When we finally got inundated by it all and realized you can only churn out the same thing so many times with a different cover, we got sick of it. So i now prefer the slow, high quality model.

 

[Mercule]

I have run two published adventures in my career as a DM, and they were among the worst games I have played. I really don't like the fact that they are packaging the things I want with the things I really, really don't.

I'm not sure I'd have phrased it quite that way -- I assume a certain amount of extraneous material for most supplements. I'm most definitely not comfortable with the way "the plan" sounds.

I'd rather see a Psionics Handbook, than psionics thrown into a mind flayer mini-setting. This is a great example of why I have issues with that model; I really, really like psionics, and have used them IMC since 1E. I really, really dislike aberrations and the idea of the Far Realms. I actually don't get why they seem to have become tied together. I've learned to deal with a certain amount of Far Realms in my psionics, but this sounds like I'll have to wade through a bunch of flavor text that I active dislike in order to pull out rules that I really want. I'll reserve final judgement until I've seen how they do the Elemental Adventures supplement, next spring.

I've also gone into great depth, in other threads, just how little love I have for the "living rules" concept. I had some hope that they weren't going to go the errata/reprint of the PHB route, but Mike's comments sure seem they will.

Right now, I'm really concerned that 5E will end up being an amazing set of rules (really, the best edition, yet, IMO) that gets spoiled by absolutely insane release/packaging schemes.

 

[TerraDave]

I'm sorry, but, isn't this largely the Pathfinder model?

A couple of rule books per year, with most of the material tied into the Pathfinder modules? Aren't the modules themselves about half module and half rules and setting material?

Well, except for the couple of "rules books" a year. Over the last 3 months, based on Paizo's releases on Amazon, I am counting 7 "rules books" at least, that is books with mechanical options that are not adventures. Of the top of my head, that includes a major monster book, player book, and a technology guide. (For all Paizo Pathfinder branded products released over the last 3 months, I counted 42, but that is a lot of stuff beyond the RPG).

 

[Hussar]

Yeah. When I wrote that I kinda forgot that Paizo really has gone into overdrive churning out books. IIRC Paizo is up around the height of 2e in terms of number of supplements per year.

 

[Nellisir]

>You can expect us to do one or two such products a year, to give people enough time to play through a campaign without overwhelming them with new options."

I don't buy that for a second. There was so much content being cooked up for 4e that I couldn't keep up with my players for all the new stuff they wanted to do with their characters. Reversing course might be a good thing for the game and for the DM, but how does that square with the profits that Hasbro is expecting from this division?

Diversity. D&D isn't just an RPG; they'll be doing board games and the like as well.

 

[Nellisir]

You know, if I were Pazio I would be looking to the OGL next year and do my own 5E line, something new (Planescapey setting?) and I think they would secure being the number one RPG publisher.

Nah, they're going to do a stripped-down Pathfinder (Basic Pathfinder) instead. It'll be pretty compatible with 5e though, I betcha.

 

[Umbran]

I dunno. I'm sure that WotC is doing everything they can do reclaim that position.

With some caveats as to what "that position" means. I don't think they are trying, for example, to be the top of iCV2 rankings.